115 
Bryozoa of the Bay of Naples. 
or Stolonifera, Ehlers *) is yet problematic, and its usual 
position is retained. 
Mr. Busk f says (p. 125), “ the polype, as far as I have 
observed, is always lodged in the upright portion of the cell.” 
This certainly is not the case in this species ; for the polypide 
is sometimes entirely in the lower part, though more often 
projecting slightly into the raised tube, as seen in the right- 
hand cell of the figure. This necessitates a change in the 
generic characters ; and the erect tubular portion must be re¬ 
garded as a prolongation of the horizontal zooecium. 
The zooecia bud from the end and from the sides, starting 
from a round disk or rosette-plate ; and from similar plates 
on the side grow tubes bearing round or elongate cells which 
do not develop into zooecia ; but as their mode of growth is so 
similar, perhaps they are abortive zooecia. Hincks mentions 
spur-like processes which start from the back of the cell of A. 
iruncata - but from his description these are radicles. May the 
spinous processes of his FarreUa dilatata be at all the same as 
the present ? 
The length of the erect prolongation of the zooecia (formerly 
the cell) is very variable, but, as a rule, is considerable; and the 
creeping tubes connecting the zooecia are also very variable — 
sometimes appearing like a thread for four or five times the 
length of the venfricose expansion, while in other cases the zooe¬ 
cium expands close to the rosette-plate of the parent zooecium. 
When dry the tubes contract in the middle as in A . ligulata 
(which in the British-Museum Catalogue is evidently drawn 
from a dried specimen), and have just the same appearance, 
with the exception of the lower part being ringed; but this is 
not always easily made out in dry specimens from Naples, as 
it is not so marked as in the ordinary anguina. I noticed in 
the British-Museum collection that the Aeteidm dissolved the 
shells on which they grew, and thus a permanent record is 
left. It is known that several Bryozoa have this power; and 
the idea suggests itself that some of the phenomena mentioned 
by Fischer J are of this kind, and it may not be useless to 
point out that in many cases it is impossible to distinguish 
fossil Aetea from Hippothoa. 
The Stomatopora gallica , D’Orb., is Aetea ) but the other 
species of the genus probably belong to Alecto and Hippothoa. 
* 11 llgpoplxordla expansa. Ein Beitr. zur Kenntn. der minirendeu 
Bryozoen, von E. Ehlers,” Kon. Gesellsch. d. Wissensch. Gottingen, 1867. 
f “ Observations on the Anguinaria spathulata Trans. Micr. Soc. 
p. 126, vol. ii. (1849). 
I “ Etudes sur les Bry. perforants de la fam. des Tdrebriporides,” Nouv. 
Arch, du Mus. d’Hist. A at. Paris, t. ii. i860; and Quart. Journ. Micr. 
Sc. vol. viii. p. 279. 
8* 
