﻿34 
  PROCEEDINGS 
  OF 
  THE 
  NATIONAL 
  MUSEUM. 
  vol. 
  44. 
  

  

  Family 
  EUCOPIDiE 
  Gegenbaur, 
  1856. 
  

  

  Genus 
  OBELIA 
  P^ron 
  and 
  Lesueur, 
  1809. 
  

  

  The 
  collection 
  contains 
  two 
  mature 
  medusae 
  of 
  Ohelia, 
  a 
  male 
  and 
  a 
  

   female, 
  each 
  with 
  about 
  128 
  tentacles. 
  It 
  is, 
  of 
  course, 
  impossible 
  to 
  

   identify 
  these 
  without 
  any 
  knowledge 
  of 
  the 
  hydroid 
  from 
  which 
  they 
  

   were 
  released. 
  

  

  OBELIA, 
  species 
  ? 
  

  

  Dutch 
  Harbor, 
  Alaska, 
  May 
  25, 
  surface; 
  2 
  specimens. 
  

   Genus 
  EUTONINA 
  Hartlaub, 
  1897. 
  

  

  Eucopidae 
  with 
  eight 
  adradial 
  otocysts, 
  with 
  a 
  peduncle, 
  with 
  

   numerous 
  tentacles, 
  but 
  seldom 
  with 
  marghial 
  cirri 
  or 
  warts. 
  

  

  Mayer 
  uses 
  the 
  name 
  Eutimium 
  Haeckel 
  for 
  this 
  group 
  (he, 
  how- 
  

   ever, 
  does 
  not 
  include 
  the 
  number 
  of 
  tentacles 
  as 
  a 
  generic 
  character), 
  

   but 
  the 
  type 
  species 
  of 
  that 
  genus, 
  E. 
  elephas 
  Haeckel, 
  was 
  beyond 
  

   question 
  a 
  Eutima. 
  I 
  formerly 
  used 
  the 
  name 
  Eutimalphes; 
  but 
  

   Eutonina 
  seems 
  to 
  have 
  the 
  better 
  claim, 
  because 
  its 
  type 
  species 
  is 
  

   well 
  known, 
  while 
  that 
  of 
  Eutimalphes, 
  E. 
  pretiosa 
  Haeckel, 
  was 
  

   founded 
  for 
  a 
  fragmentary 
  specimen 
  which 
  may 
  have 
  been 
  a 
  Tima. 
  

   It 
  has 
  never 
  been 
  seen 
  since 
  first 
  recorded. 
  

  

  The 
  question 
  whether 
  E. 
  indicans 
  Romanes 
  and 
  E. 
  sodalis 
  Hart- 
  

   laub 
  are 
  distinct 
  is 
  still 
  open. 
  Mayer 
  believes 
  that 
  they 
  are 
  probably 
  

   identical, 
  and 
  I 
  can 
  see 
  no 
  good 
  reason 
  for 
  separating 
  them. 
  On 
  com- 
  

   paring 
  the 
  figures 
  of 
  the 
  two, 
  the 
  only 
  apparent 
  difference, 
  as 
  Hart- 
  

   laub 
  (1897) 
  himself 
  pointed 
  out, 
  is 
  that 
  sodalis 
  is 
  flatter 
  than 
  a 
  hemi- 
  

   sphere, 
  while 
  indicans, 
  in 
  Romanes's 
  (1877) 
  figure, 
  is 
  considerably 
  

   higher 
  than 
  broad, 
  though 
  according 
  to 
  the 
  original 
  account 
  it 
  is 
  

   hemispherical 
  ; 
  but 
  the 
  figure 
  is 
  obviously 
  imperfect 
  in 
  that 
  the 
  gela- 
  

   tinous 
  substance 
  is 
  entirely 
  omitted, 
  and 
  when 
  we 
  consider 
  that 
  

   indicans 
  agrees 
  with 
  sodalis 
  in 
  all 
  other 
  respects 
  — 
  that 
  is, 
  length 
  of 
  

   peduncle, 
  structure 
  of 
  gonads, 
  number 
  of 
  tentacles, 
  number 
  of 
  

   otocysts, 
  and 
  even 
  number 
  of 
  otoliths 
  (12) 
  to 
  the 
  otocyst 
  — 
  the 
  

   reasonable 
  conclusion 
  is 
  that 
  the 
  figure 
  of 
  indicans 
  was 
  drawn 
  from 
  a 
  

   specimen 
  in 
  systole; 
  that 
  is, 
  when 
  fully 
  contracted, 
  as 
  in 
  normal 
  

   swimming. 
  Similar 
  outlines 
  could 
  readily 
  be 
  sketched 
  for 
  even 
  

   flatter 
  medusae, 
  as, 
  for 
  instance, 
  Phialidium. 
  The 
  two 
  are 
  there- 
  

   fore 
  combined 
  here 
  as 
  indicans. 
  

  

  EUTONINA 
  INDICANS 
  (Romanes) 
  Hartlaub. 
  

  

  Tiaropsis 
  indicans 
  Romanes, 
  1876, 
  p. 
  525; 
  1877, 
  pi. 
  15, 
  fig. 
  1. 
  

  

  Eutimalphes 
  indicans 
  Haeckel, 
  1879, 
  p. 
  195. 
  — 
  Hartlaub, 
  1894, 
  p. 
  194. 
  

  

  Thaumantias, 
  sp. 
  McIntosh, 
  1889, 
  p. 
  282, 
  pi. 
  5, 
  figs. 
  6-9. 
  

  

  Eutonina 
  indicans 
  Hartlaub, 
  1897, 
  p. 
  507. 
  

  

  Eutonina 
  sodalis 
  Hartlaub, 
  1897, 
  p. 
  506, 
  pi. 
  20, 
  figs. 
  19, 
  20; 
  pi. 
  22, 
  figs 
  3, 
  4, 
  6, 
  7. 
  

  

  