88 



o-roups of tentilla which in relation to the size of the siphons, are of extraordinary dimensions. 

 They have the characteristic aspect of those of Physophora (PI. XVI, fig. 122). Reproductive 

 organs are not to be found, so we suppose that the specimen is still very young. 



How these appendages are exactly distributed inside the facets could not be seen as the 

 stem was too much contracted. 



t'am. -Anthophysidak Brandt 35. 

 Anthophysa Brandt 35. 



53. Anthophysa foriuosa Fewk. PI. XM, figg. i23<7, 123^. 



= Atliorybia forniosa Fewk. 82. 



= Ploeophysa Agassisii Fewk. 88. 



= Anthophysa Darwinii Hkl. 88 b. 



= Anthophysa forniosa Ch. 97 a. 



= Atliorybia forniosa K. C. Schneider 98. 



= Anthophysa forniosa Bedot 1904. 



Stat. 165. Anchorage on North-east side of Daram-island (F"alse Pisangs), East-coast of MisooL 



Cat. 148 B.J. ale. 90°/^. One specimen. 

 Stat. 1S5. Lat. 3°2o'S., Long. I27°22'.9E. Cat. 100 G. formald. 4°/^. One specimen. 

 Stat. 194. Lat. i°53'.5S., Long. 126° 39' E. Cat. 23 B. formald. 4°/^. One specimen. 



The litterature of Anthophysidae is a very complete one and we were fortunate enough 

 to be able to peruse all the different articles written on these interesting specimens. The genus 

 Athorybia Eschsch. 29 is entirely wanting in the Siboga collection and of Anthophysa we found 

 only three very much altered incomplete specimens. 



The genus Anthophysa was created by Brandt 35 for a specimen caught by Mertexs. 

 Unfortunately Brandt's sketches were never published, and we have never had an opportunity 

 of seeing them. 



P'ewkes 82 describes two specimens called Athorybia forniosa, which Haeckkl identified 

 with Mertens' specimen. Fewkes 88 finds two other specimens and described them under a 

 totally different new name Ploeophysa Agassisii and adds in a note that Haeckel is wrong 

 when he thinks his Athorybia forniosa described in 82 identical with Mertens' Athorybia rosea. 

 He even thinks it a new genus and calls it Diplorvbia. Haeckel 88b in addition to the 

 description of Anthophysidae writes that his Anthophysa Darzvinii is closely allied to or perhaps 

 identical with Ploeophysa Agassizii. Chun 97a finds Athorybia forniosa Fewk., Ploeophysa 

 Agassisii Fewk. and Anthophysa Darwinii identical. That Fewkes could make a new genus out 

 of his material is simply owing to the fact that it was exceedingly altered through preservation. 



As we could not consult Mertens' figures of Anthophysa and cannot judge therefore 

 whether his and Fi:wki;s' Athorybia for77iosa are identical, we choose the denomination Antho- 

 physa forniosa in exactly the same sense as Chun does, adding moreover to the list of synonyms 

 Bedot's work of 1 904 who describes two specimens with various kinds of tentacular knobs, all 

 probably representing different stages of development of these appendages. One of these (PI. I, 



