Report on the Hydroids. 391 



Campanularia sp. 

 Plate XXV, figs. 2—5. 



Long thin pedicels — ca. 2— 5 mm. — rise from a creeping, filiform 

 stolon; they have some distinct rings below, above or (especially on 

 shorter pedicels) in the most of the length, twisted or irregularly 

 ringed; a well-marked ring under the hydrotheca. The hydrotheca 

 bell-shaped, decreasing rather evenly from about the middle down- 

 wards. The space below the diaphragm small, with a fairly sharp 

 edge below. The diaphragm is not specially thickened. The hydro- 



thecal wall verv thin and hyaline. 10 — 13 finely rounded, rather 



A 1 



low teeth with just as finely rounded interspaces, i^ == "9"- 



Hydranth with ca. 18 tentacles. 



Gonosome: the gonotheca oblong ellipsoidal, borne on a short 

 pedicel with 3 windings, with a short neck above; otherwise quite 

 smooth. 



I have not succeeded in finding any species in the literature, to 

 which the above described Campanularia might be referred with 

 certainty. 1 do not venture to set it up as a new species, however, 

 as there are a few species which have some resemblance to it. It is 

 perhaps identical with C. tiirgida Clark (1876 (49) p. 213. PL VIII, 



fig. 8) which according to the description has 12 — 16 rounded or 



A3 

 truncated teeth; on the only hydrotheca figured i" = ^; the gono- 



thecae of Camp, tiirgida quite agree with those described above ; but 

 both the description and the figures of C. tiirgida are insufficient as 

 basis for an identification. It would be very desirable if authors 

 would alwaj^s send their new species out into the world with a clear 

 and detailed description, good figures and accurate measurements, 

 preferably of several dimensions. 



In 1908 when taking part in a cruise onboard the Danish research- 

 steamer "Thor", I collected some hydroids, which were later given 

 to Mr. Sæmundsson of Reykjavik, Iceland, and they have been included 

 in Sæmundssons paper, 1911 (55). The material contains, among other 

 things, a Campanularia, which I could not identify ; Sæmundsson 

 refers it to C. Johnstoni (1. с p. 78). Later, I have compared this 

 material with the above-described Campanularia from the Danmark 

 Expedition and found that it was undoubtedly of the same species. 

 I found the following differences. The Icelandic specimens are slightly 

 smaller, the pedicels of the hydrothecae have regular rings, at least 

 above and Ье1олу, often in the whole of their length : the teeth, 

 10 — 15, are a little higher — all characters which are very variable. 

 The gonothecae are unfortunately not present in the Icelandic speci- 



