120 W. M. Bale: 



same as H. scandem^, but the descriptions certainly do not esta))lish 

 their identity. A. Agassiz says that the gonangia are gigantic as 

 compared with the hydrothecae, which is decidedly not the case with 

 H. scandens; their form also is different. The more advanced 

 mediisa is said to fill the cavity of the gonangium almost entirely, 

 and to be from l-20th to l-16th of an inch long when it escapes. 

 In //. scandens the large-st medusa measured in each case, when 

 apparently about mature, slightly under l-40th of an inch, and 

 never Qccupied more than a small proportion of the gonangium. 

 According to Agassiz, Nutting, and Hargitt the hydrothecae of 

 H. calcarata are very strongly curved at the base (Nutting says 

 doubly curved), and are generally borne in pairs, neither of which 

 conditions obtain in //. scandens. The free medusa of E . calcarata 

 is well known, but that of E. scandens lias not been observed, nor 

 has that of Pictet's specimens. 



Hebella cylindrica (Von Lendenfeld). (Platf- XTT., Fig. 11.) 



Lafo'ea cylindrica. Von Lendenfeld, Proc. Lin. Soc. N.S.W. 



ix., 1884, p. 912, pi. xl., figs. 4, 5. 

 Not Hebella. cylindrica, Pictet, Hev. Suisse de Zool., i., 

 1893, p. 41, pi. ii., tig. ."5(5; Versluys, Mem. Soc. 

 Zool. de France, xii., 1899, p. 31; Weltner, Hydr. von 

 Amboina u. Thursday Id., 1900. p. 586; Jaderholm, 

 Arkiv. f. Zool., k. svenska Vetenskapsakad. i., 1903, p. 

 274. 

 All the records of H. cylindrica since the date of Pictet's paper 

 on the Hydroids of the Bay of Amboina, refer to small forms like 

 K. scandens, which were, by that author, associated under the name 

 of H. cylindrica. The form which 1 now, with little hesitation, refer 

 to that species is of far larger size than any of tlifsc l)ut it certainly 

 agrees better with Von Lendenfeld's figure and description, neither 

 lof which, however, directly indicates the si/e of the specimens. The 

 drawing is said to l)e made with " A objective and C t)cular," with- 

 out even iiitiinatiug wliose lenses are refcn-ed to; if Zeiss', the com- 

 bination quoted would give a magnification of over 100. and the 

 figure, if on that scale, would represent a tOiiii wilh the hydrothecae 

 less than .25 mm. in length, or much too small for even //. sra/n/cns. 

 As Von. Lendenfeld expj-essly mentions tliat tiie hydrothecae, as well 

 as the hydranths, are " large as in L. parasitica," it is evident 

 that the reference to the lenses employed does not indicate the scale 

 on which tlie fitivire was drawn. 



