Terms Bryozoa and Polyzoa. o5 



they have been induced to use the name Polyzoa under a 

 misapprehension. 



There is another argument which has been brought forward 

 very recently by Prof. T. Rupert Jones *, who points out 

 that Ehrenberg included animals under Bryozoa which are 

 now known not to be correctly so placed. This requires us 

 to turn and see what Ehrenberg says ; but we may first remark 

 that we suppose Prof. Rupert Jones found the general reason 

 of priority so insufficient that he saw he must find the poly- 

 zoists a better reason than they had themselves discovered. 

 I should like to know if they acknowledge this new argument 

 or say it need not have been given. If they do not ignore 

 Prof, Jones's ' Geology of Sussex' and thank him for his sup- 

 port, this is what, in polite diplomatic language, would be 

 called a change of front, but which we prefer to consider a 

 retreat. 



Did Ehrenberg describe the Bryozoa as a group? In 

 1 Symbolce Physicse' he has "circulus I. Anthozoa," and, 

 divided from this, "circulus II. Bryozoa," which he separates 

 thus: — "ore anoque distinctis, tubo cibario perfecto. (Vibratio 

 aperta ciliorum ope ; an omnibus ? Ovipara et gemmipara, 

 sponte nunquam dividua.)" And in l Die Corallenthiere d. 

 Rothen Meeres ' he similarly divides them ; and the " doppel- 

 miindige Corallenthiere " or Bryozoa he defines " mit einem 

 kammerigen, innen nicht strahligen Korperbaue, besonderem 

 Mund und After, oft bewimperten wirbelnden Fangarmen." 

 And his families are Cristatellina, Halcyonellea, Cornularina, 

 Escharina, Celleporina, Auloporina, Antipathina, Myriozoina. 



Cornularia is, I suppose, a Hydrozoon ; and Antipathes 

 and Aulopora are Actinozoa ; but because he did not fully 

 understand these three, this is no reason for saying he did not 

 establish the Bryozoa as a group ; for in how many groups 

 animals have been placed in error ! Anthozoa has had many 

 strangers ; or, forsooth, Millepora ! what has it not included ? 



The type of Ehrenberg is Alcyonella; and he says, in 

 1 Symbola? Physicse,' " Alcyonellce hujus Circuli typum referre 

 videntur," and, further on, " Flustrce enim et Sertularina ex 

 meis observationibus neque Ascidiis compostis nee Hydra 

 similia videntur sed Alcyonellis." He then describes Zoobo- 

 tryon peUucidus, a clearly marked and easily studied species. 



It is true he included in mistake Antipathes ; but he does 

 not seem to have been quite sure, and says (he. cit.) y " Eidem 

 Circulo Flustras et Sertularina nonnulla, forsan omnia, quin 

 imo Antipathes genus subjugenda esse censeo." 



* 'Geology of Sussex,' Dixon and Jones (Brighton, 1878). 



3* 



