118 Mr. H. J. Carter on new Sponges. 
furnished with a “ short pedicel,” and was ‘14 inch high by 
2 inch broad ;” the skeletal spicule “ acerate,” accompanied 
by a “bihamate”’ flesh-spicule; and that the above name 
was given provisionally, may be learnt from the following 
passage, viz. “‘ These peculiarities of structure strongly induce 
me to believe that the sponge should form the type of a new 
genus.” 
A few pages on, the same species (as we shall see by and by) 
obtained in 1864 by Mr. J.G. Jeffreys at Shetland, is structu- 
rally described under the name of “‘Desmacidon Jeffreysti” (ab. 
ab. p. 347) ; but here no mention is made of the flesh-spicule, nor 
is the entire form of the sponge given, as it was “‘ cut into nu- 
merous pieces by the dredge;” but a basal fragment is stated 
to have presented “ numerous tubular cloace, varying from $4 
an inch in height and 2 lines in diameter to 4 inches in height 
and 2 inch in diameter at the base, usually decreasing gradually 
in size to the distal extremity, and termmating in a contracted 
apparently permanent orifice” (p. 348); the word “ appa- 
rently” of course implies doubt. It is evident from Dr. 
Bowerbank’s description here that he was influenced by the 
‘presence of the spiculo-fibrous layer in placing this sponge 
under his genus Desmacidon (ib. ib. p. 10). 
Thus we find it repeated by Dr. Bowerbank again, with a 
very good illustration, ten years afterwards, viz. in 1870, and 
again from a specimen supplied by Mr. Norman, who dredged 
it at Shetland in 1868 (Mon. B. 8. vol. iii. pl. lxui.) ; mean- 
while, however, Mr. Norman himself had described it, and 
had given it a new generic name, 1. e. “ Oceanapia,” having, 
as he states, become ‘‘ convinced” that Dr. Bowerbank had 
mistaken it “for something very different from what he had 
imagined.” Hence the following synonymy :— 
“Oceanapia Jeffreysti (Bow.) = Desmacidon Jeffreysit, 
Bow. Brit. Spongiade, vol. 11. p. 347,=Isodictya ro- 
busta, ibid. p. 304.” (Report of Brit. Association 
for 1868, p. 334.) 
As Mr. Norman’s description of this sponge is far more 
satisfactory than any that had preceded it, we, of course, find 
it quoted by Dr. Bowerbank (B. 8. vol. ii. p. 158) with 
other observations of his own, among which, as Mr. Norman’s 
name for it is taken from the sponge being in form like 
a “Swede turnip,” Dr. Bowerbank rightly observes that 
the choosing of ‘‘ Oceanapia,” as a generic term, is “ unfor- 
tunate,” because “there are numerous other sponges of a 
similar form, both British and exotic, which vary so greatly 
in their anatomical structures as to render it quite out of the 
