8 bulletin: museum of comparative zoology. 



the body, sub-elliptical in shape, the posterior margin almost sttaight, the 

 anterior more curved. The internal cartilage (Plate 3, Fig. 5) lies in a hori- 

 zontal plane around the hinder end of the body ; it is almost semicircular, 

 delicate and transparent, and pointed at the extremities ; on the external sur- 

 face near the extremity is a facet with which the base of the fin articulates ; 

 the long axis of the fin is directed somewhat forward with respect to the 

 median axis of the cartilage. 



The Head is short ; the eyes prominent, standing out somewhat further 

 than the sides of the body. 



The Arms are long, slender, and sub-equal, and taper very gradually to their 

 ends, but as these were in many instances mutilated, it is impossible to give 

 accurate dimensions : the length was, hosvever, about 5-6 cm. The suckers are 

 small, placed in a single series, very closely set, and of firm consistency, em- 

 bedded in much soft connective tissue and not in the muscular substance of 

 the arms. Most of the suckers were lost, and it was only here and there that 

 I could find traces of the cirri alternating with them : those I did find were a 

 little longer than the diameter of the suckers, and rather stout and blunt. 



The Color, when alive, is shown in the sketch reproduced on Plate 2, 

 Fig. 2. 



The solitary specimen on which this species is based came into my hands 

 in a state approachmg disintegration and fell to pieces under very careful 

 handling. The characters which I was able to decipher are, however, quite 

 sufficient to prove that it cannot be placed in any genus yet known. Fortu- 

 nately a sketch, partly colored, was made of the animal immediately after its 

 capture, which, reproduced in Plate 2, gives the form and proportions of the 

 animal much more clearly than could be ascertained from the preserved speci- 

 men. On the margin of the drawing is a memorandum by Mr. Agassiz to the 

 effect that the creature was " like Cirroteiithi'^, but no film" (umbrella). This 

 statement is very important, for it proves that the absence of the umbrella is 

 not due to defective preservation. 



Family ALLOPOSIDAE. 



Alloposldae, Vcrrill, '81, p. 365. 



BOLITAENA. 

 Dolitaena, Steenstrup, '59, p. 183. 



Although this generic name was published and very briefly characterized 

 more than forty years ago (Steenstrup, '59, p. 18.3), the type was first di"- 

 scriljcd in the "Challenger" Report (Hoyle, '86, p. !(>) from notes made in 

 the Copenhagen Museum. It was tia-n placed by me in tlie family Puly- 

 jMMlidai! (Octopcxlidat-) along witli EUdimrUa and some other forms, but on 

 reconsidering the que.tlion in connectioa with the specimen to be described 



