308 G. C. J. VOSMAER, 
In view of such statements the question arrises: are indeed 
Azinella, Phakellia and Acanthella three different genera? I wish to 
show in the following pages that the answer hereon is beyond doubt 
affırmative. 
In order to settle the question we have first of all to carefully 
examine what the fathers of the genera -— ScHMIDT and BOWERBANK 
meant by them. In the second place we have to see in how far 
later authors by describing “new species” modified the genera. We 
will learn then that several of these “species” in fact do not belong 
to the genus under consideration. If we then have established what 
the distinctive characters are said to be, we have to reexamine them 
with our modern improved methods. Before we can compare the 
different genera we will thus first study them separately. 
l. Axinella. 
This genus is established by Oscar ScHamipr in 1862, who gives 
(p. 60) the following diagnosis: “Halichondriae dendroideae, tenacius- 
culae, saepe subelasticae et flexibiles. Axis firmior e fibris subcorneis 
et spicula ineludentibus formatus. Spieula non insignia, saepe longiora 
et arcuata.” ScHMipr states further, and this is important to realise, 
that the *axis” is “ein, vorzugsweise in der Längsrichtung ausge- 
dehntes Hornnetzwerk”, in which spicules are imbedded. ScHmipT's 
Azxinella is identical with Grantia of NArvo (1833); this name, being 
preoccupied, had of course to be changed. ScHmipr described five 
species; two of these viz. verrucosa and cannabina correspond accord- 
ing to SCHMIDT !) to Spongia verrucosa and cannabina of ESPER (1794); 
two other ones, cinnamomea and foveolaria are said to be identical 
with NAarno’s Grantia cinnamomea and foveolaria; the fifth species is 
called A. polypoides n. sp. AS to A. cinnamomea SCHMIDT says in 
the text that it is perhaps identical with Espzr’s Spongia damicornis: 
in the explanation of the plates it is, however, called Azinella dami- 
cornis. There can hardly be any doubt as to the identity of these 
two; consequently the name cinnamomea is at any rate superfluous. 
I hope to show elsewhere that no specific distinetion can be made 
between Awinella verrucosa, cinnamomea (damicornis) and polypoides ; 
propably foveolaria and cannabina are likewise to be included. As 
1) Confirmed by EHLERS (1870). It seems that this author wishes 
to bring Phakellia ventilabrum likewise to Axinella; this is of course a 
mistake. 
