57 



Diphycs Sarsii, Keferstein and Emlers 61, who have baptized Diphyes conoidca and Diphyes ovata, 

 and Chun 88 who gives a description of Epibulia inonoica, whilst in 97 a he finds in the collection 

 of the f^lankton expedition Galeolaria tntucata Sars, Galeolaria biloba Sars and changes the 

 defective generic name Epibulia into Galeolaria injiata and Galeolaria monoica of i888. 



Of these 8 different specific denominations only 5 ought to remain. First of all Galeolaria 

 (Diphyes) ovata Kef Ehl. is a very remarkable Calycophorid and nothing can be said definitely 

 about it, as no other investigator since 1861 has ever found it again. 



Galeolaria (Diphyes) liirgicia Ggbr. must remain if no somatocyst is really to be found 

 in the superior nectophore. If we look at our sketch (PI. IX, fig. 76) of Galeolaria ntonoica we 

 wonder whether Galeolaria (Diphyes) hirgicia does not possess the same microscopical somatocyst 

 and whether Gegenbaur has overlooked it. The remaining species Galeolaria (Diphyes) biloba 

 Sars 46, Galeolaria (Diphyes) Sarsii Gegenbaur 60, Galeolaria (Diphyes) conoida Kef. and 

 Ehl. 61, Galeolaria (Epibulia) monoica Ch. 88, Galeolaria (EpibrUia) infiata Ch. 88 are to be 

 distributed in our opinion among the three species, Galeolaria biloba Sars 46, Galeolaria trjin- 

 cata Sars 46 and Galeolaria inojioiea Ch. 88. 



We find with Chun 87 a that Galeolaria biloba Sars and Galeolaria (Diphyes) Sarsii 

 Ggbr. 60 are identical. Gegenb.\ur speaks of a narrowing of the nectosac near the aperture 

 in the superior nectophore but we do not find any special notice of this particularity either in 

 Sars' figures or text. As far as we can judge both description and figures of Sars and Gegenbaur 

 are for the rest identical. 



Galeolaria trzincata Sars is according to us also a very definite species; and we should 

 like to identify with it Keferstein and Ehlers' Diphyes conoidea\ there seems to be no difference 

 and we should like to add also Chun's Epibulia infiata, though there are no figures given and 

 the text is incomplete as to the exact structure of the basal part of the superior nectophore. 

 If ventral lobes are not developed, Epibulia iifiata is to be considered identical with Galeolaria 

 iruncata Init we cannot find this out, as Chun's description is unfinished. 



Another difference between Chun's and Sars' specimens might be the ventral enlargement 

 in the nectosac of the superior nectophore which according to Chun appears in Epibtilia i?ifiata 

 and which if one looks at Sars' figures (Taf. 7, figg. i, 3) seems not to e.xist in the species. 

 In the text however we find (46 p. 42) "Inwendig in diesen Knorpelstiicken sind zwei Hohlen, 

 "nahmlich ausser dem so ebengenannten Flussigkeitsbehalter eine grosse Schwimmhohle (oder 

 "ein Schwimmsack) die kurzcylindrisch, in der Mitte etwas bauchig gegen das vordere Ende 

 "etwas zugespitzt ist . . . ." 



Finalh' Galeolaria (Epibulia) monoica Ch. is a species characterized by the excessive 

 smallness of the somatocyst and "die abweichende Bildung der sogenannten Verschlussklappen 

 "am Schirmrande". 



What this deviation in structure is, Chun does not tell. As we found two superior necto- 

 phores which show both characteristics we called it Galeolaria monoica, hoping that the structure 

 of the lobes near the velum should happen to be the same as in Chun's specimens. 



In the Siboga expedition we found besides Galeolaria quadrivalvis Less., also Galeolaria 

 biloba Sars, Galeolaria monoica Ch. and a new species which we call Galeolaria Chuni. 



SlliOGA-EXPEDlTIE IX. 8 



