Manchester Memoirs, I ^ol. h. ( 1 9 1 1 j, No. %*^. 1 1 



Among the characters given by KolHker (8) of the 

 genus Pavonaria are these " Lange, starke Seefedern mit 

 kurzem, dickem Stiele, und dicken, niedrigen Blattern 

 deren Rand nur undeutHch in Kelche geschieden ist." 

 From the figures given the calices are quite clearly 

 differentiated in Moroff's species. 



" Radiare Kanale fehlen." In P. dofleini, according 

 to Moroff, radial canals are present, but no statement is 

 made as to their position in relation to the dorsal or 

 ventral side of the rachis ; and they are not shown in the 

 figures. 



" Kalkkorper von typischer Nadelgestalt in der 

 Hauptstammen der Tentakeln." In P. doflemi there are 

 no spicules in the tentacles. Moroff's statement that 

 spicules are abundant in the wall of the pinnae and in the 

 whole stock, however, proves that there is an important 

 difference between his specimens and the specimen from 

 Metlakatla. But for this difference I should be inclined 

 to believe that Pavonari<x dofieini is a moderately large 

 specimen of OsteoccUa septeiitrionalis and that P. cali- 

 fornica is a younger form of the same species. 



It is a great pity that Moroff gives no statement or 

 figure of the size or shape of the spicules in the pinnae. 



If Z'. dofieini is a distinct species, it is a very remark- 

 able fact that two gigantic sea-pens presenting the same 

 exceptional structural features should occur on the same 

 coast. 



Nutting's species Balticina pncifica appears to me to 

 be quite distinct, but the specimens he refers to the species 

 Balticina blakei (? B. finniarcliica) are probably identical 

 with Osteocella septentrionalis. 



I may remark, at this point, that I object very 

 strongly to the change of name from Pavonaria to 

 Balticina and refuse to accept it. The genus Pavonaria 



