Anatomy of Gorgonid.'E. 



125 



retracted, even when the latter is seen in prohle (PL III, fig. 

 5) it is much wider than deep. 



Tlie mesenteries are small and inconspicuous. They extend 

 from the gullet directly to the calicle walls and attach them- 

 selves higher up on these walls than in other species described. 

 They do not seem to extend below this level, hence the 

 lower part of the gastro-vascular space is empty with the 

 exception of an occasional- ovum. 



The retractor muscles occupy their usual position with ref- 

 erence to the mesenteries. They are small and weak. In this 

 connection it may be well to mention the significant fact that 

 the polyps although able to retract entirely within the calicles, 

 seem to do so slowly and with great difficult3^ A zoantho- 

 deme can be plunged into weak alcohol and the polyps killed 

 before they can or will retract, a proceeding that could by no 

 means be successfully accomplished in the case of either of 

 the preceding species. Perhaps these weak retractor mus- 

 cles are the cause of the inability to retract on the part of the 

 polyps. It would be convenient for the naturalist if other 

 species were affected in a like manner. 



The mesenterial filaments are reduced to a minimum. All 

 that can be seen of these structures is an occasional ill-defined 

 mass attached to the mesenteries which can hardly be distin- 

 guished from ova. Indeed they may be ova in a very early 

 stage of development. If this is the case the mesenterial fila- 

 ments are entirely wanting in this species. 



The ova are few and these few seem addicted to occupying 

 pecuHar positions, for, although they are seen attached in the 

 normal manner to the mesenteries, they are also found on the 

 bottom of calicles a considerable distance below the mesen- 

 teries (PI. Ill, fig. 5? '])•, or even in the water-vascular canals 

 which open into the calicles from below. I have been unable 

 to find an}^ pedicels by which these ova are attached as is the 

 case in other species. 



CcENENCHYMA not SO thick in proportion to size of axis as 

 in other species described with exception of Rhipidigorgia. 



