No. 1.] ACTINIARIA OF THE BAHAMAS. 21 
minute points scattered irregularly over the column; and I am 
inclined to believe that these authors had to do with a specimen 
in which the coloring matter was distributed in minute dots 
over the surface of the column, in which case, as I can testify 
from experience, the appearance is strongly as if the column 
was covered by exceedingly minute scattered tubercles. In 
other respects, judging both from the description and from the 
figure, the correspondence to the Bahama specimens is so great 
as to allow of little doubt of their identity with the St. Thomas 
forms. 
C. aurantiaca (D. Ch.), the Cereactis aurantiaca of Andres 
(83), is certainly closely related to C. passtflora, but differs 
sufficiently to constitute another species. The most important - 
difference lies in the absence of the verrucz in the adult fassz- 
flora; while in aurantiaca, according to Andres, they are very 
evident, being of a pure white on a brownish ground, and tolerably 
large. A nearer relation is apparently to be found in the Parac- 
tzs erythrosoma of Klunzinger ('77), which inhabits the Red 
Sea. This form, originally discovered by Ehrenberg (’34), was 
referred by him to the genus Actinza (/sacm@a); Klunzinger, 
however, transferred it to the genus Paractis on account of its 
possession of a margin raised so as to form a collar; and Andres 
placed it among the doubtful forms belonging to the genus 
Anemonia, regarding it as related to A. sulcata. I have little 
doubt but that this form is to be referred to the genus Condy- 
factis, and that its correct appellation is C. erythrosoma (Ehr.). 
It agrees in many particulars with the Bahama specimens, and 
I am almost inclined to consider the two forms identical; but 
on account of the absence of any information as to the internal 
anatomy of the Red Sea form, I have thought it better to sep- 
arate them. In the absence of verrucz, and in the general 
coloration, the resemblance is very striking. In some details of 
the coloration, however, such as the greenness of the tentacles 
and in the size, differences, not very important certainly, are to 
be noticed. 
If Andres’ description of the genus (founded upon a single 
1 Ina preliminary notice of this paper, which was published in the Fokus Hopkins 
University Circulars, Vol. VIIL., No. 70,1 referred to this form as Cereactis Bahamen- 
sis, n. sp., indicating, however, its probable identity with Condylactis passifiora. I 
have since become convinced of the correctness of such an identification. 
