THE VICTORIAN NATURALIST. 131 



We find, therefore, that our specimen differs in five characters. 

 It is nearly twice the height ; its dark yellowish brown colour 

 contrasts strongly against the pallid shade of the C. digitata. 

 The difference in the furcation is not so evident as in some 

 specimens ; it agrees with Dr. Cooke's species. The most 

 important characteristic differences lie in the shape of the upper 

 portions of the branches, and the number of processes on the 

 apex of each. The G. digitata is especially shown to have 

 spathulate branches, whilst our specimens are all cylindrical ; and 

 the five processes which give the name to the C. digitata are 

 increased in ours to seven or eight. Still I am uncertain, and 

 would wish to obtain more specimens before asking Baron von 

 Mueller to submit the whole question to Dr. Cooke. 



A Phosphorescent Ostracod. — While bathing at Brighton 

 beach on a calm hot night about three weeks ago, I noticed a 

 considerable amount of phosphorescent light. It occurred when 

 the water was agitated, and flashed out from distinct points, each 

 apparently about the size of a threepenny piece, the movement 

 made by the hands while swimming causing the light to shine out 

 in a striking manner. Walking along the beach afterwards, the 

 light was found to proceed, apparently, from animals washed on 

 the sand by gentle wavelets. These only rarely showed any light 

 until the ground was trodden near to them, when they at once 

 shone out brilliantly. A bottle was obtained and a considerable 

 number was secured by taking up with the fingers a little of the 

 sand showing luminosity. On washing the sand off in the bottle 

 the animal swam about very rapidly, leaving behind it a trail of 

 light which sometimes was very bright indeed. On reaching 

 home the bottle was found to contain a quantity of a form be- 

 longing to the Ostracoda. Not being aware that this group in- 

 cluded animals exhibiting phosphorescent phenomena, I had to 

 satisfy myself, after vainly looking for another source, that this 

 animal was the cause by laying one of the animals on my hand 

 and going into the dark, when it was easy to produce the light by 

 pushing the animal about with the finger. Placing one under the 

 microscope, and turning down the lights, it could be examined as 

 a self-luminous object. I could not certainly determine the 

 source of light, but it commenced to glow about the anterior of 

 the animal, though it would spread, if sufficiently irritated, until 

 the whole of the body was luminous. Apparently a substance 

 luminous and cloud-like spread through the water, though nothing 

 could be seen when examined in the ordinary way with a fairly 

 high power. A dozen or so in a little water, when shaken, 

 emitted sufficient light to read a watch-dial. — J. Shephard. 

 Brighton, 12th November, 1894. 



