392 bulletin: museum of comparative zoology. 



cuninidae. 

 CuNiNA Eschscholtz. 

 (5ensM Maas (1904a, 190-4b); Bigelow (1909a); Mayer (1910)). 



Narcomedusae with perradial gastric pockets; with otoporpae; 

 with nine or more tentacles and marginal lappets; with or without 

 peripheral canal-system. 



Vanhoffen (1908a) does not recognize this genus, including most of 

 its species in his Aeginidae; an arrangement Avhich I have already 

 criticised (1909a, p. 49), on the ground that it results in the combi- 

 nation of species with per- and with inter-radial gastric pockets. 

 No less than nineteen "species" have, at one time or another, been 

 referred to Cunina, but it is certain that few of them are valid. Mayer 

 (1910) recognizes seven, but one of these, C. vmcilaginosa, was so 

 vaguely figured and described (Chammisso and Eysenhardt 1821, taf. 

 30) that it must always remain doubtful whether the original speci- 

 mens possessed, or lacked, peripheral canals and otoporpae. And 

 one, C. prolifera, may prove to be a solmarid, either a Polycolpa or a 

 Pegantha, it being doubtful whether it has any true gastric pockets 

 (Mayer, 1910, p. 480; Vanhoffen, 1908a, p. 65)^ 



Among the five species remaining in Mayer's list, C. proboscidae 

 Metchnikoff, is conspicuous for its gelatinous peduncle and long 

 proboscis, and for the fact that its canal-system is degenerate, short 

 lengths of the canals alone being open, as demonstrated by Mayer 

 (1910, p. 476) from serial sections. It is historic because of its re- 

 markable method of reproduction (Metschnikoff, 1886, Woltereck, 

 1905, StschelkanowzeflF, 1906). 



In C. lativcyitris Gegenbaur, likewise, there is a low gelatinous 

 proboscis, as shown in Gegenbaur's figure (1856, taf. 10, fig. 2), a 

 fact I have myself been able to substantiate on two specimens from 

 Naples. But the peronial canal-system is well developed. Vanhoffen 

 it is true says (1908a, p. 66), that C. lativeniru has no peripheral canals; 

 quoting Metschnikoff (1878) as his authority. But the Hertwigs not 

 only describe well-developed peronial and ring-canals for this species, 

 but illustrate them both on cross-sections and surface views of the 

 margin (1878, p. 15, taf. 1, fig. 1, 2; taf. 10, fig. 4). And inasmuch as 

 they are equally visible on one of the Mediterranean specimens just 

 mentioned, which agrees in general outline, low proboscis, number of 

 tentacles (12), and outlines of gastric pockets, with Gegenbaur's 



