362 Rev. T. Hincks's Catalogue of Zoophytes. 



Plumularia, Lamarck. 



I have referred, in the Introduction, to Prof. Forbes' s sugges- 

 tion for a dismemberment of this genus. Mr. Busk has divided 

 it into two very natural groups, for one of which he retains the 

 name Plumularia, assigning to the other that of Halicornaria. 

 They are distinguished by the position of the nematophores 

 (tubules of Johnston) — curious and probably offensive organs, 

 with which one section of the Sertulariadae is furnished — and by 

 the character of the gonophores. 



The following species, included in the Catalogue, belong to 

 Plumularia as now restricted : — cristata, tubulifera, pennatula, 

 and myriophyllum. The rest must be referred to Halicornaria, 

 with the exception of P. falcata, which should be united with 

 Sertularia. 



Hoplangia durotrix, Gosse. 



This species must be withdrawn from the Catalogue. I find 

 that the specimens which I referred to it are only a form of 

 Caryophyllia Smithii. 



Caberea Hookeri, Fleming. 



Mr. Alder has pointed out to me an error into which I have 

 fallen in my note on this species. I have assumed the Cellularia 

 Hookeri of Fleming to be identical with Johnston's species of 

 the same name, and with Busk's Caberea Hookeri. This, how- 

 ever, is not the case. Fleming's C. Hookeri, which was described 

 from specimens sent from Torquay by Sir W. Hooker, is the 

 Crisia Boryi of Audouin — the Caberea Boryi of Busk's Catalogue. 

 The species to which Dr. Johnston and Mr. Busk have given the 

 name Hookeri is really the Flustra setacea of the ' British Ani- 

 mals,' which Fleming had previously described and figured i n 

 the Mem. of the Wernerian Soc. (vol. ii. p. 251) as F. Ellisii. 

 This point has been satisfactorily established by Mr. Alder. 

 According to the law of priority, therefore, Caberea Ellisii should 

 take its place as the name of this species instead of C. Hookeri. 

 This form seems to be strictly northern. Now that the syno- 

 nymy is explained, there is no ground whatever for supposing 

 that it has been met with in Devon. 



Lepralia hastata, Hincks. 



I have described and figured under this name what I supposed 

 at the time to be a new species. I am now convinced that it is 

 only a peculiar variety of the well-known L. linearis. The spe- 

 cies must be cancelled, but the form is remarkable enough to be 

 recorded as L. linearis, var. hastata. 



In the Introduction to the Catalogue, it was stated that about 



