January 5, 1893] 



NATURE 



2X\ 



PROPOSED HANDBOOK TO THE BRITISH 



MARINE FAUNA. 



'T* H E admirable monographs issued under the auspices 



■*■ of the Ray Society, and in Van Voorst's series, by 

 such well-known authorities as Forbes and Hanley, Alder 

 and Hancock, M'Intosh, Allman, Hincks, Brady, Norman, 

 and others, are amongst the most creditable and useful 

 productions of British Zoology, and all naturalists must 

 devoutly trust that there are still others of a like classical 

 nature to follow, and that, for example, Prof. M'Intosh 

 will soon be able to complete his long-expected work on 

 the British Polychasta. 



But many Marine zoologists feel that, quite apart from 

 such exhaustive and expensive monographs, and only 

 aspiring to occupy a very much humbler position, there is 

 pressing need of a "'pocket" or seaside "Invertebrate 

 Fauna," which could be used in much the same way as 

 the botanists' " Field Flora." It has been suggested to 

 me more than once during the last few years that I would 

 be doing useful work in compiling such a book ; and as 

 no one else seems ready or willing to do so, I feel inclined 

 to make the attempt. Some material has already been 

 accumulated for the purpose, but before going further I 

 wish to lay my views before my fellow zoologists, in the 

 hope that they will be kind enough to criticize the scheme 

 and give me the benefit of their advice. 



The only existing work of the kind is Gosse's well- 

 known, and, so far as it goes, very excellent little " Manual 

 of Marine Zoology," but that book does not really meet 

 the present want, as not only is the date of publication 

 1855-6, since when the number of genera and species has 

 probably been something like doubled, but also Gosse 

 merely gives the names of the species, while the book I 

 think of would, in order to be of any real use, require to 

 aim at giving a brief but sufficient diagnosis and figure of 

 every British species. I would adopt as " British " the 

 area defined by Canon Norman's British Association 

 Committee in 1887. 



Probably the most convenient form of publication 

 would be some four to six small volumes, each dealing 

 with one or two of the large groups. This would allow of 

 the groups being published as they were ready, not 

 necessarily in zoological order, and would also be con- 

 venient for the use of those interested in one set of 

 animals. 



There would be definitions — perhaps with occasional 

 analytical tables or keys— of orders, families, &c., down 

 to and includmg genera. Under each genus would be 

 given all sufficiently defined species with a brief description 

 of each either in tabular form or in series, as seems most 

 suitable in each case, and with an indication of size, 

 range, and habitat. Many species might be described 

 very briefly in terms of preceding species, the differences 

 merely being pointed out. By simplicity of language, 

 avoidance of unnecessary repetition, and use of con- 

 tractions it might be hoped that each species could be 

 confined on an average to a couple of lines. 



Illustrations would be either in the form of numerous 

 small outline figures on thin paper plates inserted as near 

 as possible to the pages where the descriptions occur, or 

 as small groups of cuts (as in " Gosse ") in the text. 

 There would be a figure of the whole animal in each 

 important genus, or small family, and the figures of the 

 species would represent the diagnostic points only, e.g. 

 in the zoophytes there would be a figure in the genus 

 Plumularia of an entire colony, or shoot, while the 

 s^GCits pinnata, setacea, catharina, &c., would be repre- 

 sented each by a small figure showing the pinnae, calycles, 

 or nematophores as the case required. 



I shall now give a few examples, taken from different 

 groups, of the method in which the genera and species 

 might be treated, in order that specialists may have the 

 opportunity of judging and criticizing. 



NO. 1210, VOL. 47] 



I. From Coelenterata : — Genus Antennularia. 



Stems simple or branched ; pinnae verticillate ; nema- 

 tophores along the stems ; gonolhecae axillary, 

 unilateral. 

 A. antennina, L., stems clustered, usually simple ; hydro- 

 thecse separated by 2 joints. 6 to 9 in. high. Gen. 

 distr. deep w. 

 A. ramosa, Lamk., stems single, usually branched ; hydro- 

 thecae separated by i joint only. 6 to 9 in. high. Gen. 

 distr. deep w. 



II. From Crustacea:— Family Maiid.«. 



HvAS. Carapace tuberculous, no spines ; branches of 

 rostrum not divaricated ; second joint of antenna 

 dilated ; no teeth beneath last joint of walking legs. 

 //. araneus, L., carapace not contracted behind post- 

 orbital process. 3 in. Common, shallow. 

 H. coarctatus. Leach, carapace contracted behind post- 

 orbital process. I in. Gen. distr. shallow. 

 Pisa. Carapace may be tuberculous, with strong postero- 

 lateral spine ; branches of rostrum divaricated at 

 extremity ; second joint of antenna slender ; terminal 

 joint of walking legs toothed beneath. 

 P. tetraodon, Leach, carapace with small tubercles ; 

 anterolateral margin with 4 spines. 2 in. Rare, S. coast. 

 P. gibbsii. Leach, carapace with large rounded elevations, 

 but no tubercles, no spines on antero-lateral margin. 

 Rare, deep w., S. coast. 

 Maia. Carapace covered with numerous sharp spines ; 

 branches of rostrum strongly divaricated ; no teeth 

 beneath terminal joint of walking legs. 

 M. sqtdnado, Latr. 10 in. long. S. and W. coasts o 

 England. 



III. From Tunicata : — Family Molgulid^. 

 Eugvra. Branchial sac with no folds. 



E. ghitinins. Moll., circular area on side free from sand. 



i in. Shallow \v., gen. distr. 

 E. globosa, Hanc. entirely covered with sand, i in. 

 Pera. Bran. s. with 5 folds each side. 



P. hancocki, Hnin., matted fibres at poster, end. \ in, 

 Irish Sea, 20 fms. 

 Molgula. Bran. s. wirh 6 or 7 folds each side. 



M. inconspiciia, A & IL, 6 folds, sandy, dors. lam. entire, 



no pap. on stigmata. \ in. 

 M. inipura, Hel., 6 folds, sandy, small papillae on edges of 



stigmata. I in. W. of Ireland, shallow. 

 M. simplex, A. & H., few hairs, little or no sand, 6 folds, 

 anus fringed, dors. tub. horse-shoe, aperture to left. 

 i-t in. 

 M. ttibifera, Orst., 6 folds, anus fringed, dors. tub. horse- 

 shoe, dors. lam. toothed, sandy, i in. E. coast. 

 M. ampuUoides, v. Ben., 6 folds, anus fringed, dors. tub. 

 horse-shoe, 3 l)ars on fold, dors. lam. entire, i in. 

 E. coast, shallow. 

 M. socialis, Aid., 6 folds, anus fringed, dors. tub. horse- 

 shoe, 4 bars on fold, dors. lam. entire, sandy, gregarious. 

 A in. shallow w. S. coast. 

 M. holliana, Hrdn.,6 folds, dors, tub. serpentif, hairs but 



little sand on test. ^J in. W. of Ireland, 10 fms. 

 M. occulta, Kupf., 7 folds, dors. tub. horse-shoe, dors. lam. 

 toothed, whole body sandy, i in. Shallow w. S. and 

 W. coasts. 

 M. oculata, Forb. , 7 folds, siphonal region alone free from 

 sand, and retractile between folds of test, i in. Gen. 

 distr. Shallow w. 

 M. Citpifcrvtis, Hrdn. , 7 folds, globular, not attached, no 



sand. \ in. S. coast, shallow w. 

 M. citrina, A. & H., 7 folds, attached by left side, no 

 sand ^-^ in. under St., litt. E. and W. coasts, 

 Ctenicella, as Molgula, but branchial and atrial lobes laci- 

 niated. 

 C. complanata, A. & H. , 6 folds on left, 7 on right, de- 

 pressed, attached, sandy, | in. 

 In conclusion, I need scarcely say that I shall be very 

 grateful for suggestions, and, if the work is carried on, 

 for any information from specialists about less known 

 species, and the discrimination of allied forms, and for 

 specimens, and also for references to any descriptions 

 which might be likely to escape my notice. 



W. A. Herdman. 



