124 Mr. H. J. Carter on two Hexactinellid Sponges. 



Hah. Marine, fixed on hard objects. 



Lac Philippine Islands. 



Obs. The patulous ends of the tubular branches, accom- 

 panied bv the plumose or radiating structure of the lamina 

 out of which they are formed at this part, and the dichotomous 

 manner of the branching itself, closely ally this species to 

 Farrea occa, whose structure and mode of growth is also thus 

 explained. In a specimen, too, of the latter growing upon a 

 branch of Loj^hoheh'a prolifcra dredged up on board H.M.S. 

 * Porcupine,' the fixed end (which, unlike the single layer 

 forming the tube above, is composed of massive reticular 

 tissue) presents a number of minute hexactinellids, each of 

 which has one arm attached to the fibre, as in Eurete farre- 

 opsis. This is also the case in Farrea infundihularis (Ann. 

 & Mag. Xat. Hist. 1873, vol. xii. p. 448, pi. xvii. fig. 1), 

 whose stnicture, in many respects, is so very like that of 

 Eurete farreopsis that one can only be considered a variety 

 of the other ; but I do not observe this remarkable feature in 

 either of the Aphrocallistes or in Aulodictyon Woodwardii, 

 Kent. 



On account of the absence of the sarcode in the specimen 

 above described, I am unable to state the position which the 

 subskeleton- and flesh-spicules respectively and relatively 

 presented. Nor am I able to say any thing of the dermal or 

 growing layer of sexradiate spicules, which in these specimens 

 is generally washed off with the rest of the sarcode to give 

 them a more attractive appearance in the market, thus leaving 

 nothing but the bare skeleton with a few fragments of dried 

 sarcode here and there, in which, however, some of the minute 

 spicules are almost sui'e to be retained. 



Possessing a broom-like or scopuline spicule, I am able to 

 place this species among those characterized by a " scopuline 

 shaft" (Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 1873, vol. xii. p. 559), and 

 with Farrea occa, as characterized by the tubular branches 

 being patulous at their orifices (ib. p. 360). 



Like as the general form of this specimen is to that given 

 by Marshall of Semper's Eurete simplicissima (Zeitschrift f. 

 wissensch. Zoologie, xxv. Bd. 2nd Supp. Taf. xii. c), there is 

 no part of the detail of the structure given by Marshall in 

 Taf. xiv., except the attachment of the sexradiate to the 

 vitreous fibre (fig. 32, a), which can be identified with it {E. 

 farreopsis). What value may be due to the absence of the 

 scopuline shaft and rosette in E. aimplicissima (p. 185), I am 

 unable to say, seeing that the reappearance of the spicules in 

 the centre of the vitreous fibre in Marshall's illustrations 

 (Taf. xiv.) indicates that the specimen had perished long 



