FRONDIPORA. 



39 



Other species noticed by Authors. 



3. Frondipora verrucosa, Lamx. 



Fasciculi opening in distinct verrucose elevations ; (dorsal surface 

 transversely striated? M.-Edw.). 



Ki'iisenstema Yemicosa, Lamx. Expos, p. 41, pi. 74. figs. 10, 13 (nee 



pi. 26. fig. 5) ; nOrlmpiy, 1. c. p. 678. 

 Frondipora veiTucosa, Blainv. 

 Frondipora reticulata, var. /3, Smitt, I. c. p. 407. 



Bab. Kamtschatka, Spitzbergen (Tilesius, D'Orbigny). 



The principal apparent difference between F. reticadata and F. 

 verrucosa consists in the circumstance that in the latter the ends of 

 the fasciculi form isolated verrucose elevations ; whilst in the former 

 they form elongated, irregular, confluent projections. 



Professor Smitt regards this difference as sufScient only to con- 

 stitute a variety ; and, in the absence of further information re- 

 specting the Ai'ctic form, his opinion would seem to be very probably 

 correct. 



Besides Kamtschatka, for which locality M. Lamouroux quotes 

 the authority of Tilesius, he also mentions the East Indies and 

 Austraha as habitats for Krusensterna verrucosa ; but upon vrhat 

 authority does not appear. 



Dr. Solander is quoted for the East-Indian habitat ; but as the 

 form figured in Ellis and Solander, pi. 26. fig. 5, undoubtedly repre- 

 sents the common Mediterranean species, and as Ellis left no ex- 

 planation or description of the objects figured in that plate, and Dr. 

 Solander's description of Millepora reiicidata (p. 138) cannot apply 

 to fig. 5, but to a Retepore, it is clear that Lamouroux has no 

 authority from him for assigning the East Indies as a locality for 

 K. verri(:COsa. 



As regards Australia, M. dc Blainville remarks that Lamouroux 

 must in all probability also have fallen into a mistake, as the species 

 is not noticed by Lamarck amongst those in the collection brought 

 home by Pe'ron and Lesueur. 



If really distinct therefore, which is not impossible, from F. 

 reticulata, F. verrucosa is strictly an Arctic form. It does not, 

 however, appear to have occuiTed amongst the Arctic Polyzoa 

 brought under the notice of Prof. Smitt. 



4. Frondipora marsigli, Blainv. 



M. de Blainville (Man. d'Actinol. p. 406) merely cites Marsigli's 

 incorrect figure of F. reticulata as representing this supposed species ; 

 and as he gives no reason for regarding it as distinct, the name 

 should probably be altogether expunged. 



The Frondipora marsigli of Michelin (Iconog. p. 68, pi. xiv. fig. 4) 

 is Fungella (^Fasciculipora), mihi. 



