90 W M. Bale: 



tinct than in the niouiitetl specimens of .S'. camptimdaria. The 

 tentacles are longer than tlmse of that species, a difference also 

 perhaps dependent on the condition of the specimens. 



ZVGOPHYLAX RUFA Bale. 



Campanularia rufa, Bale, Cat. Aust. Hyd. Zooph., 1884, 

 p. 54. pi. 1, tig. 1 ; Trans, and Proc. Roy. Soc. Vict., 

 xxiii., 1887, p. 91. 



" Campanidaria '^ rufa, Levinsen, Vidensk. Medd.. fra den 

 naturh. Foren, 64, 1913, p. 292. 

 This species was ranked by Billard as a synonym of Lictorella 

 antipathes (Lamarck), but erroneously, as I gather from the same 

 observer's remarks in his report on the Bi-itish Museum collection, 

 in which he says that L. antipathes does not exhibit the slight 

 distal narrowing of the hydrotheca, nor the everted margin, both 

 of which features characterise the present species (as mentioned in 

 the original description). It may also be noted that L. antipathes is 

 described as a coarse, woody, and rigid form, reaching according 

 to Lamarck and Allman about four inches, and according to Bil- 

 lard fourteen centimetres, while Ritchie says that some of the 

 specimens of which he obtained portions must have much exceeded 

 these dimensions. Z. rufa, so far as it is known, is a small, deli- 

 cate form, under an inch in height, with the fasciculation limited 

 to a few tutes on the stem only. The original Lafo'ea halecioides 

 of Allman (187.'3) seems to resemble Z. rufa more than does L. 

 antipathes, but it differs in the absence of a perisarcal diaphragm 

 in the hydrotheca. The nearest species to Z. rufa would seem to be 

 Lictorella. concinna Ritchie (Mem. Aust. Mus. iv., p. 823), which 

 is of similar habit, but its hydrothecae differ in form, especially 

 in the much elongated stalk-like condition of the proximal part, 

 whieh is below the diaphragm. 



The pinnae of Z. rufa are sub-alternate; between every two on 

 the same side are two hydrothecae, one of them axillary. The 

 apophyses are distinct, and mostly about double the diameter of 

 the hydrotheca at the point of attachment. There is usually no- 

 intervening segment, though in exceptional cases such a segment 

 may occur. The portion of the hydrotheca lielow the diaphragm 

 or " floor " is short, genei'ally about one-sixth of the whole length. 

 In a few cases the apo]>hyses wliich support the axillary hydrothecae 

 are narrowed down gradually to the diameter of the hydrotheca- 

 base, and not divided fi-om the latter by a distinct joint. 



