368 Prof. P. M. Duncan on Prof: G. Lindstrém’s 
8. Stenocyathus vermiformis, Pourt.—Lindstrém and Pour- 
talés differ so much in their description of the appearance and 
morphology of this coral that it is hardly conceivable that 
they are treating of the same species. ‘The species was de- 
scribed and delineated by Pourtalés in his ‘ Deep-sea Corals’ 
(1871, p. 10, pls. i. & i). Itis a very elongated and cylin- 
drical form, with a shallow circular calice, septa not exsert, 
rather thick, and in six systems of three cycles. Pali thick, 
curled, and in front of the secondary septa. Columella of a 
single twisted process. Coste indicated by lines of very flat 
tubercles. The older parts of the corallum are nearly filled up 
by a thickening of the septa; but the process is never carried 
out to a total obliteration of the interseptal chambers, which 
can be traced in the shape of slender canals to the very base. 
The costal tubercles are hollow and communicate through 
narrow canals with the interseptal chambers. Pourtalés con- 
sidered that “ these little cavities are, no doubt, homologous 
with hollow roots of Rhizotrochus, Thecocyathus, and other 
genera of the family.” The height of the type was from 25 
to 40 millim. and the diameter only 2 or 3 millim. 
In the generic diagnosis it is stated that there is no epitheca. 
The corals considered to belong to this species by Prof. 
Lindstrém never assume the vermiform shape!!! and are of 
a regular turbinate growth. In fact the diameter of the 
calice is one half of the length of the corallum. ‘There are no 
tubercles as described by Pourtalés, and the dots “can in 
no way be considered as homologous to the rootlets in Rhizo- 
trochus, Thecocyathus, and several other corals.” In Prof. 
Lindstrém’s corals there is a dense network of dissepiments 
which are developed out of the spines or tubercles on the 
lateral surfaces of the septa. 
In the description of the corals dredged in the ‘ Blake’ 
expedition Pourtalés contents himself with remarking :— 
“‘] cannot find in my specimens the dissepiments mentioned 
by Mr. Lindstrém.” 
Pourtalés gave me a specimen of this curious species, which 
tallies with his description, and not in the least with Prof. 
Lindstrém’s. It is only necessary to remark that the so- 
called dissepiments are not what are usually called such, and 
that they certainly are not synapticula, which are structures 
independent of ornamentation. 
Probably Prof. Lindstrém’s very hasty criticism was 
bestowed upon a totally different species from that recognized 
as Stenocyathus vermiformis, Pourt. 
It must be observed that there is an epitheca in every 
specimen. 
9. Colosmilia fecunda, Pourt—This coral gave Pourtales 
