Vou. 2] Torrey.—Hydroids of the San Diego Region. 31 
33. Sertularia furcata Trask. 
Sertularia furcata, Trask, 1854, p. 112, pl. 5, fig. 2. 
Sertularia furcata, Agassiz, 1865, p. 145. 
Sertularia furcata, Clark, 1876a, p. 258, pl. 39, fig. 3. 
Sertularia furcata, Torrey, 1902, p. 66, pl. 8, figs. 73-5. 
Trophosome. Stems short, unbranched, rising from a creeping 
stolon to heght of 10-15 mm.; divided into short internodes, each with 
a pair of hydrothecae opposite and in contact on one side of the stem for 
half their length. Two strong marginal teeth and a large aperture. 
Gonosome. Gonangia broadly ovate, compressed, with moderate 
terminal aperture. 
Distribution. San Diego Bay, 5 fathoms; Coronado Is., Mex., 
18-24 fathoms; San Pedro, Cal., 9 fathoms; San Francisco, shore 
rocks. Farallone Is., Cal. (Trask). Santa Barbara and Santa 
Crum, Cal. (Clark): 
Nutting (:04) has identified this species with the Dynamena 
pulchella of d’Orbigny from Patagonia, quoting Clark’s deserip- 
tion of S. furcata, however. I am unable to follow him because 
his reproduction of d’Orbigny’s figures does not show the con- 
tact of the members of each pair of hydrothecae, which is a 
marked character of the species, the internodes are longer and 
more slender than the constantly short internodes of S. furcata, 
and the two species are widely separated geographically as well. 
It is true that Clark’s figure does not show the contact of the 
hydrothecae, but that is because he has probably drawn the 
reverse rather than the face of the stem. This view is supported 
by the position of the gonangia, which ordinarily occur on the 
face of the stem, and by the similarity of Clark’s figure to fig. 
73 of my former paper, representing the reverse of one inter- 
node of the stem. 
Gonangia were present in colonies collected in November, 
1897, and July, 1901. By a strange confusion which I came upon 
in the preparation of the present paper, I laid elaim in my 
former paper to the discovery of the gonosome of the species, 
though it was well known to me that Trask, as well as Clark, 
had described and figured both trophosome and gonosome. 
* Nutting (:04), who calls attention to this blunder, has himself erred 
in ascribing the first complete description, including gonosome, to Clark. 
I do not see Trask’s paper in Nutting’s bibliography, and infer that he 
was not acquainted with it at first hand. 
