Eo 
1877.| ANTHOBRANCHIATE NUDIBRANCHIATE MOLLUSCA. 225 
CaLyciporis GUENTHERI, Abraham, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 
4th ser. vol. xviii. p. 133, pl. 6. f. 1, 1 a-le (1876). 
Hab. ——? 
Gen. Lameturiporis, Ald. & Hane. 1855. 
Onchidoris, De Blainv. 1816’. Onchidiorus, Férussac, 1821. On- 
chidora, Cuv., 1830. Villiersia, D’Orbigny, 1837. Oncidiodoris, 
Agassiz, 1847. Oneodoris, Agassiz, 1847. 
Body depressed. Mantle large. Head with a veil in place of oral 
tentacles. Branchiz simply pinnate, set in an open circle or ellipse, 
non-retractile. Odontophore narrow, with a few spines in each 
transverse row. 
This genus contains two well-defined divisions, first enunciated by 
Messrs. Alder & Hancock. 
a. Body not very depressed ; mantle with moderate-sized spicula. 
Spawn of few coils, cup-formed. Odontophore with two Jarge 
spines and two or more rudimentary ones; usually a simple 
central plate. 
1. L. aspera, Ald. & Hance. 
Doris aspera, id. Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ix. p. 32 (1842), figured 
in Mon. Br. Nud. pl. 9. f. 1-9. 
D. pallida, Agassiz. ? D. fusca, Fabricius?. 
Hab. North European shores ; eastern coast of North America. 
2. L. acuriuscu.a. 
D. acutiuscula, “Stp.,” Moller, Index Moll. Gron. in Nat. Tidssk. 
iv. p. 79 (1842-3). 
Hab. Eastern coast of North America. 
3. L. Proxima, Ald. & Hance. 
D. prowima, id. Mon. Brit. Nud. p. 42, and pt. 6, fam. 1, pl. 9. 
f. 10-16 (1854). 
Hab. Danish and English coasts. 
4. L. LOVENI. 
D. muricata, “ Miiller,’ Lovén, Index Moll. Lit. Scand. &c. 
p- 5 (1846). 
D. loveni, Ald. & Hance. 
Hab. North-European shores. 
* Onchidoris was constituted by De Blainville in 1816 fora supposed species 
(“O. leachit”) which we now know to be L. bilamellata, his specimen being still 
existing in the collection of the British Museum. This was pointed out by Alder 
and Hancock, and the erroneous characterization exposed, in 1854; nevertheless 
compilers of Zoological text-books and reference-books still continue to talk of 
“ Onchidoris leachii ;? and several of them have taken Onchidoris, in spite of its 
hypothetical characters, as the name of the whole genus, 
* Morch considers it identical with D. fusca, Miller, and with D. muricata, 
Meyer and Mobius (non Miiller). 
Proc. Zoou. Soc.—1877, No. XV. 15 
