484 Cr. C. J. Vosmaer 



Wide sense, otherwise, as has been said so often, we should want names 

 for nearly every individuai. Haeckel himself was conscious of this, but 

 he took a way that had too mauy side-patlis. 



In Order to give a clear view of the principal differences Haeckel 

 gives of the two species he mentions, I will put his diagnoses one next 

 to the other. 



Leucandra cramhessa H. Leucandra aspera [0. S.) H. 



»Dermalfläche fast glattoder anliegend »Dermalfläche borstig-stachelig, 

 behaart. 



Gastralfläche kurz-stachelig. Gastralfläche stark dornig. 



Hauptmasse des Skeletts aus regulä- Hauptmasse des Skeletts aus sub- 

 ren und subregulären Dreistrahlern regulären und irregulären Dreistrahlern 

 (IV. und V. Gr.) gebildet. (IV. Gr.) gebildet. 



An der Gastralfläche sagittale Vier- An der Gastralfläche sagittale Vier- 



strahler mit kurzem Apical-Strahl. strahier mit starkem Apical-Strahl. 



In der äußeren Hautfläche (nicht über Colossale spindelförmige Stabnadeln 

 diese vorragend) liegen ohne Ordnung [I. Gr.) ragen weit über die Dermal- 

 zerstreut spindelförmige Stabnadeln fläche vor ; andere sind oft auch im in- 

 (I. Gr.). neren Parenchym zerstreut. 



Diese colossalen Stabnadeln sind Dieselben sind 4 — 6mal so dick , als 



6 — lOmal so dick, als die kleinen Drei- die Dreistrahler, und stehen bald dün- 

 strahler und Vierstrahler.« ner, bald dichter, oft in Bündel ver- 



einigt, von der Dermalfläche schief ab.« 

 The ronghness of the ontside, owing to the gigantic rods (»colos- 

 sale Stabnadeln«) apparently is considered by Haeckel as the principal 

 thing. In Order to make the diflference greater he says in his diagnosis 

 of L. cramhessa that the rods do not project the surface, but in his 

 description we find the following remarkable contradiction : »Eigentlich 

 liegen sie« the rods) >> nicht völlig in der Hautfläche, sondern gegen die 

 Längsachse der Person mit der inneren aboralen Spitze etwas geneigt, 

 so dass die äußere orale Spitze etwas vorsteht« (1. c. II. p. 184). So 

 the difference between the two so-called species is a quantitive one. 

 The same is true with regard to the length of the »Apical-Strahl« of the 

 tetrasceles, as well as the diameter of the gigantic rods. 



In the Naples Zoological Station I studied a rather large number of 

 specimens of both spouges. Very big specimens from the »Porto mer- 

 cantile«, were often brought to me and the well-known conservator Sal- 

 vatore LoBiANCO told me that those Spouges were sent to dififerent 

 Museums as L. aspera (0. S.) H. I do not know who introduced this 

 name for them but a few sections taught me that it was not L. aspera 

 in the sense Haeckel takes it i. One may call those specimens L. cram- 



1 I feel obliged to say that I am by no means respousible for the determin- 

 ation of Sponges, sent from the Station to dififerent Museums etc. 



