Mmidicstcr Memoirs, Vol. Iv. (191 1), No. 23. 5 



and many series of sections cut, therefore, it is very mis- 

 leading to found generic or specific characters on the 

 supposed absence of siphonozooids from any one region. 

 I may say, however, that the statement made above con- 

 cerning the distribution of siphonozooids in this specimen 

 has been confirmed by the examination of sections. 



The stalk of the specimen is so imperfect that it is 

 impossible to give a full and accurate account of it. There 

 is one point of interest about it, however, to which reference 

 may be made. Moss (ll) refers to and figures four " lines 

 of pores on the stalk " in his specimen. These " pores " 

 can be easily seen on some parts of the stalk, but it is 

 perfectly clear from an examination of a stained section 

 that they are not simple pores, but siphonozooids. I 

 cannot find them on the bulbous enlargement of the stalk, 

 only on the narrow part, but I have not made an exhaustive 

 examination of the bulb. In the stalk there are a few 

 scattered calcareous spicules, oblong in shape, and about 

 ■08 X '03 mm. in size. {,Fig. 3.) 



The most remarkable, and, to my mind, characteristic 

 feature of our specimen, has yet to be described. As 

 compared with man}'' other pennatulids, it is extremely 

 fleshy. This fleshiness is due to a great increase in the 

 mesoglcea, with its penetrating canals and cell cords, on 

 the ventral side of the ventral longitudinal canal. (The 

 terms " dorsal " and " ventral " are applied as suggested 

 by Jungersen (6), and are the exact opposite of the same 

 terms as used by Kolliker (8j.) 



The significance of this may be seen in the diagrams 

 {Figs. I and 2), which show a transverse section of the 

 rachis of Osteocella and of Virgnlaria. 



In this mass of flesh, and opening into' the main 

 ventral canal, there may be seen a row of long tubes. (R.) 



