ON FRESHWATER POLYZOA. 333 
tion, the animal may be seen attaching itself to flat surfaces, as the under 
side of stones, and of the floating leaves of the water-lily and other aquatic 
plants. In this condition it is closely adherent throughout its entire length 
to the surface on which it is developed, and forms elegant dendritic or con- 
fervoid growths, radiating from a common centre. In the second (Var. (3) 
it will be found fixed to surfaces of small extent, as thin, submerged stems, 
straws, &c., and as it continues to increase in size, the branches having no 
extensive surface of attachment, soon become free, and a more or less entan- 
gled bushy mass will be produced. Now, I believe the “Corallenartiger 
Kamm-polyp” of Schaffer to correspond to the P. repens var. ὦ of this Re- 
port, while the “ Federbusch-polyp” of Résel corresponds to the variation β, 
and if so, the two animals must be viewed as identical in species. Miller 
believed them to be distinct, but he founded this opinion on certain charac- 
ters in the figures and description of Rosel, some of which were obviously 
erroneous, while others afforded no grounds for specific distinction at all. 
The distinction, therefore, drawn by Miiller is nugatory, and the specific 
name campanulata, originally applied by Blumenbach to Résel’s animal, and 
adopted by subsequent writers, is applicable to no distinct species, and must 
therefore be expunged. 
If the above criticism be admitted—and it is what I have arrived at after 
a very laborious examination—the synonyms of P. repens will stand thus :— 
Variation a. 
1754. Corallenartiger Kamm-polyp. Schaffer, Armpolypen, tab. 1. figs. 
1,2. (Original figures.) 
1758. Tubipora repens. Linnzeus, Syst. Nat. Edit. x. 
1761. Tubipora repens. Linneus, Fauna Suecica, 2219. 
1773. Tubularia repens. Miller, Verm. ter. et fluy. vol. i. pars 2. p. 16. 
1776. Tubularia repens. Miller, Zool. Dan. Prod. 3064. 
1781. Der Polyp mit dem Feder-busch. Eichhorn, Naturg. der kleinst. 
Wasserthiere, tab. 4. (Original figure.) 
1789. Tubularia repens. Gmelin, Linn. Syst. Nat. p. 3835. 
1804. Tubularia lucifuga?. Vaucher, Bull. de la Soc. Philomat. ann. xii. 
No. 81. pl. 19. f. 4, δ, 6, 7,8 *. (Original figures, bad.) 
1806. Tubularia repens. Turton, Linn. Syst. Nat. vol. iv. p. 668. 
1816. Plumatella lucifuga?. Lamarck, An. sans Vert. Ist edit. vol. ii. p. 108. 
1816. Naisa repens. Lamouroux, Pol. flex. p. 223. } 
1821. Naisa repens. Lamouroux, Expos. Méth. p. 16. (Not the figure 
tab. 68. f.2, which is a copy of Vaucher’s Tubularia repens. 
1824. Naisa lucifuga?. Deslongchamps, Encye. Méth. Zoophytes, 1824. 
p: 562. 
1826. Plumatella lucifuga?. Biainville, Dict. Se. Nat. tom. xlii. p. 12. 
1826. Plumatella calearia?. Carus, Tabulz Illustrantes. (Original figure.) 
1828. Alcyonella, tertius evolutionis gradus. Raspail, Mém. de la Soc. d’Hist. 
Nat. de Paris, vol. iv. p. 130. 
1831. Alcyonella stagnorum. Ehrenberg, Symb. Phys. Evert. Dec. 1. Pol. 
fol. a. 
1834. Plumatella repens. di, : 5 
1834. Plunatella a ifuga. \ Biainville, Actinologie, p. 490. 
1836. Plumatella lucifuga?. Lamarck, An. sans Vert. 2nd edit. vol. ii. p. 124. 
1836. Plumatella repens. Dumortier, Mém. sur les Pol. comp. d’eau douce, 
p- 21. 
* Figs. 9 and 10 evidently belong to 7. repens on the same Plate, and are transposed by 
an error of the engraver, while figs. 4 and 5 belong to 7. lucifuga, though by a similar error 
they are placed with 7’. repens.. 
