154 Mr. H. J. Carter on Grantia ciliata, 
tions of the Microscopical Society’ (vol. vii. p. 79, pl. v.), 
where the illustrations of the entire sponge (figs. 1 and 2) are 
quite different from those in the third volume of his ‘ Mono- 
graph.’ 
These differences were observed by Hiickel in 1870, when 
he made two species of them under the name of Sycandra 
ciliata for the former and S. coronata for the latter (‘ Die 
Kalkschwamme,’ vol. ii. pp. 296 and 304, and ‘ Atlas,’ Taf. 
li. and lviii. and Taf. li. and 1x.). But it does not seem to have 
influenced Dy Bowerbank in 1874, although the Rev. A. M. 
Norman, who edited the posthumous volume of his work (vol. 
iv., 1882), adopts the separation (p. 230). 
However, after carefully reading and comparing Hiickel’s 
description of Syeandra (Grantia) ciliata, S. coronata, and S. 
rapnanus respectively (vol. ii. p. 296 et seqg.), together with 
the specimens of the two former found here, it appears to me 
_that they run into each other in such a way that, although 
there may be grounds for making a separate species of the 
latter, I, with the late Dr. Bowerbank, see none for separating 
specifically the two former. The differences that exist be- 
tween Sycandra ciliata and 8S. coronata appear to me to arise 
chiefly from the circumstances under which they have grown, 
viz. whether this has taken place in strong currents or com- 
paratively still water, which, on account of the extreme 
brittleness and delicacy of the finer and longer spicules on the 
surface ot the body, leads to their being more or less broken 
off. If these spicules have been, retained entire, they are 
generally so matted together in the dried specimen as to ob- 
scure the conuli from which they proceed and thus give the 
surface of the body a shaggy (‘ zottig,’’ H.) character; while 
those of the peristome or mouth may be more or less worn 
away, thus corresponding with Johnston’s type specimen, Dr. 
Bowerbank’s illustrations (vol. ii. 7. c.), and my own expe- 
rience here ; but if, on the other hand, the finer and longer 
spicules of the conuli have been broken off, while the shorter 
and stouter ones which succeed them inwards remain, which is 
generally the case, then the conuli will of course be exposed, 
and the peristome remaining intact, we shall get a specimen 
like that represented by Dr. Bowerbank in the ‘ Transactions 
of the Microscopical Society’ (/. c.), the former being Hiickel’s 
_ Sycandra ciliata and the latter his S. coronata. As to spe- 
cific differences being deduced from themeasurements of spicules 
and even the entire forms themselves of sponges, these are go 
variable generally that it is only here and there that they 
afford any trustworthy evidence. 
But there is a difference in structure between Sycandra 
