THE PELAGIC TUNICATA. 211 



tloiicriptiun. Xo serious attempt was made to establish tlie genera of the 

 group on a secure foundation until Fol published his important memoir in 

 1872. This author satisfied himself of the generic distinctness of the species 

 studied by Chamisso and Mertens, and gave an exact definition of Oikoplenra. 

 Fol's treatment of the subject has been accepted by all subsequent writers. 

 There can, it would seem, be no question, then, that our species is an Oiko- 

 plenra and not an Appendicularia., as these genera are now understood. The 

 important and somewhat difficult question to be answered is should the 

 specific name flar/ellum stand ? 



Most recent writers have regarded Jidi/cJliini as a nomen nudum m far as 

 Chamisso's description is concerned. It woukl be permissible, by the recog- 

 nized rules of nomenclature, for us to take this view of the matter, to then 

 consider the name as re-established and adequately defined by Huxley, and 

 so to retain it as Huxley's not Chamisso's. There is, however, the practical 

 objection to this that future research may discover that the name will have 

 to stand for the animal to which Chamisso applied it. We have conse- 

 quently thought it wiser to name the sjjecies anew, and certainly no more 

 fitting name co ild be selected than that of the famous zoologist who first 

 recognized and made clear the place of Appendicularia in the zoological 

 scale. 



