30 "TERRA NOVA" EXPEDITION. 



explained on p. 58, necessitated by the present conditions of cost of printing and 

 paper has compelled us to excise this portion of our work, but the papers 

 themselves are no doubt readily accessible to the student. 



It remains only to say that, though as we have indicated {supra), the 

 gatherings consigned to us might have been much more exhaustive and repre- 

 sentative than they are, the material analysed in this Report is by far the most 

 voluminous that has been brought to this country from either New Zealand or 

 the Antarctic regions. 



(iii) ARCTIC AND ANTARCTIC TYPES OF FORAMINIFERA. 



It is -not easy to form any comparison between the foraminiferal fauna listed 

 in our Report and the tables of species from high latitudes published by Brady 

 (B. 1884, F.C., pp. 779-785), because, of the eight Antarctic stations figuring m 

 his list, five are from localities on or adjacent to the Southern extremity of the 

 American continent, and two of the other Stations represent rich insular 

 gatherings roimd Kerguelen Id. and Heard Id. The remaining list is from 

 "Challenger" Station 150 in the Southern Ocean (52° 4' S.) in 150 fathoms. This 

 is approximately the latitude of our Stations 11 and 12 (Official Stations 

 Nos. 208-9), and the depth is very similar, but the nature of the Challenger 

 material, which was organic debris from a rocky bottom, yielding only sixteen 

 species of Foraminifera, forbids any direct comparison with the oozes obtained at 

 these two " Terra Nova " Stations. Brady did not list the species derived from 

 the deep water "Challenger" Stations off the Ice Barrier (Stn. 153 — 1,675 fms., 

 Stn. 155 — 1,300 fms., Stn. 157 — 1,950 fms.), all of w^hich would have afforded 

 suitable material for a comparison with our Report. 



Murray in the " Summary of Scientific Results of the Voyage of the ' Chal- 

 lenger ' " (1895), vol. 1, p. 498, gives a list of forty species of Foraminifera 

 from Station 153. This is probably not exhaustive. It contains many interesting 

 forms, but perhaps the most noticeable point is the absence of Glohigerina 

 pachyderma (Ehbg.), and the presence of G. dutertrei, d'Orb. 



Nor is it easy to make any direct comparison with the foraminiferal fauna 

 from Arctic latitudes given in the same table because our list includes many deep- 

 water Stations, whereas 300 fathoms represents the maximum depth in Brady's 

 list. But a comparison of the species in Brady's Arctic and Antarctic lists with 

 our own records yields some noticeable results, in some respects confirming 

 Brady's observations and in others disproving them. 



Thus Brady records the following species as Antarctic but absent from the 

 Arctic : — 



1. Articulina funalis, Brad)'. 



2. ,, ,, var. inomata, Brady. 



