370 SIR C. KLIOT OX XCDIBKANTHS [Dee. T. 



The living animal was spong\' and almost gelatinous in textui'p. 

 The alcoholic specimens though flabby have become considerably 

 shrunk and hardened. The larger one (to which all the measure- 

 ments given below refer) is 5-7 centimetres in length, 3'8 in breadth, 

 a,nd 2'3 in height. Down the centre of the back runs a some- 

 what indistinct ridge, on each side of which is a row of five pits, 

 with black bottoms. There is one similar pit behind the branchial 

 pocket. In the smaller specimen the distribution of the pits 

 is different, and it would appear that no particular arrangement 

 can be regarded as characteristic of the species. In this specimen 

 also the dorsal ridge and a knotty crest between the rhinophores 

 are much more distinct than in the larger one, bearing out Alder 

 and Hancock's remark that these features are most conspicuous 

 in the young individuals. In both specimens the back is covered 

 with irregular tuberculate warts or prominences. The rhino- 

 phores project out of tubes which are about 5 millimeti-es high 

 and thickly studded with tubercles, about five being set round 

 the edge. The branchial pocket projects about 6 millimetres and 

 opens backwai'ds. In the larger specimen it is distinctly bilabiate. 

 The upper lip is thickly tuberculate in its whole extent and bears 

 three compoimd tubercles on its edge which close like a valve ; 

 the lower lip has no tubercles on the edge and is altogether 

 smoothei- than the other. In the smaller specimen the pocket 

 o[)ens backwards, but is round and not two-lipped. It is probable 

 that the tubercles increase in number and size as the animal 

 grows older. The branchite are large and sti'ong, tripinnate, and 

 apparently five in number, but so deeply bifid that it would 

 hardly be wrong to call them ten. In both specimens the foot is 

 deeply grooved atid notched in front and the upper lamina united 

 to the head below the mouth, an arrangement which differs from 

 that seen in iSphcprodoris (Jreins), where the mouth seems to be 

 between the two lamina?. 



The labial cuticle is very strong and much puckered, but no 

 armature was discernible. Round the buccal mass, at the 

 posterior end of the oral tube, are set a number of glands, of 

 which I found ten in one specimen and eight in the other. They 

 are mostly three-fingered in shape. The ludula consists of only 

 23 rows, each containing about 40 teeth on either side of the 

 naked rhachis, but looks large and bi'oad on account of the 

 unusual size of the teeth, which are simply hamate with yellowish 

 bases and colourless hooks. The innermost teeth are very small, 

 but gradually increase in size up to the 15th, after which they ai-e 

 equal. The two or three outermost are reduced. The stomach is 

 small but free. No armature was discernible in the reproductive 

 organs. 



I think these specimens are clearly the Doris areolata of 

 A. & H., and equalh^ clearly referable to the genus Trippa, Bgh. 

 Probably Doris spongiosa Kelaart (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist, (3) 

 iii. 1859, p. 303) is the same species. Trippa {Phlegmodoris) 

 mephitica Bgh. is a closely allied form, and I should not be 

 surprised if it e-\en turned out to be a varietv of, or identical with, 

 [18] 



