234 SCIENTIFIC RESULTS OF THE 
The species is easy to distinguish from the former, by its color and 
especially by the denticulated hook of the large lateral plates. 
5, Adalaria Lovéni (Alder et Hancock). Pl. X, fig. 6-8. 
Doris muricata? O. F. Muller, Sars, Bidr. til Sdedyrenes ‘Naturh., 
1829, p. 15. Tab. Il, fig. 7, 8. 
Doris Lovéni, Alder et Hance. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 3 Ser., X, 1862, 
p. 262. 
Lamellidorts Lovént, Friele et Arm. Hansen, 1. c. p. 3. 
Lamellidoris Lovént, G. O. Sars. Moll. reg. arct. Norv., 1878, p. 364. 
Tab. XIV, fig. 1. 
? Lamellidoris muricata (Mill.) Abildgaard. Mérch, Faunula Moll. 
Ins. Firdens. Naturh. Foren. Vidsk. Meddel., 1867, p. 75.1 
Doris muricata, Miller, Sars (4), Lovén, Ind. Moll,, 1846, p. 5. 
Doris muricata, M. Sars. Reise i Lofoten og Finmarken, 1851, p. 75. 
Color dorsi et rhinophoriarum e brunneo lutescens, paginz inferioris 
et branchiz lutescens. 
Dentes laterales (magni) hamo edentulo; externi (lingue) 
numero 12. 
Hab. Oc. Atlant. septentr. 
This species was first noticed by Sars, who hesitatingly regarded it 
as perhaps the Doris muricata of Mueller. It is, moreover, the prin- 
cipal form of the Doris muricata (‘ Mueller, Sars”) of Lovén (his 
second variety being the true L. muricata) ; has been established 
(1862) as a species by Alder and Hancock, and has as such been 
adopted by Friele and Hansen, as well as by G. O. Sars, who lately 
gave figures of the teeth on the tongue. The species has been much 
confounded with the “ D. muricata,” which is a Lamellidoris ; it is 
certainly distinct from the Ad. proxima, and seems also to differ from 
the other described species. 
-Of this form I have had fifteen individuals for examinat#on, kindly 
sent me by Mr. Friele, of Bergen, and dredged in the neighborhood of 
that place. : 
1 According to Mérch (Rink, Gronland, I, 1857. Tillag 4, p. 78), the D. 
muricata, Sars, should be the D. liturata, Beck ; this last is a mere variety 
of the Lamellidoris bilamellata, and with this should, on the other hand, 
according to Méreh (Faunula Molluse, Isl. Naturh. Foren, Vidensk. Med- 
del., 1868, p. 203), the D. provima of Meyer and Moebius be synonymous, 
which belongs to the quite different genus, Adalarta. An example more— 
if such were needed—of the way in which the Nudibranchiata.have been 
synonymized and systematized. 
