no 



CHAS. W. HARGITT. 



There would seem therefore to be more or less uncertainty as 

 to the exact affinities of the species, as will appear in what fol- 

 lows. As to Agassiz E. plana there is no description. Hincks' 

 description relates only to the trophosome and is thus far clear 

 and sufficient. But of the medusa he gives no account, and 

 indeed states that it is unknown, or doubtful. 



Haeckel's description relates only to the medusa, but is appar- 

 ently entirely inapplicable to our species. E. g., his species has 

 forty-eight tentacles at birth, and at maturity from 100-120. 

 Diameter of new-born medusa I mm., and at maturity 6 mm. 

 Gonads on distal half of radial canals. 



The following characters are diagnostic of our species : 



In general features quite comparable with other well-known 



Fig. 12. Obeliaflabellata. 



medusae of Obelia. In common with others the creature has the 

 habit of everting the bell at will, and again recovering its shape 

 Radial canals 4, gonads ovoid in shape and borne about mid- 

 way between stomach and margin of bell, well -developed at 

 birth. Tentacles 24 in number at birth, number in adult not 

 known. Manubrium rather large, mouth four-lobed. Diameter 

 of medusa at birth .4 to .5 mm. Size in adult not known. 



Hence as was suggested above, it seems quite evident that 

 Haeckel's species is not identical with that of Hincks, as shown 



