142 BULLETIN OF THE 



figures which he gives of the tentacular knob seem to show that it is the 

 genus Agalma of Eschscholtz. Haeckel refers it to his genus Crystal- 

 lodes. The whole embryological history oi Agalma and Crystallodes, with 

 the exception of the appearance of a yolk-sac in the latter, according to 

 Haeckel, as Metschnikoff says, is very much the same. Dana published 

 his description in 1857, two or three years after the great works by the 

 German naturalists on the Siphonophores of the Mediterranean. 



I know of two genera of Leuckart's Calycophoridae, a group of Siphono- 

 phores, which appears to me well defined, which have been described 

 from our eastern coasts. In his " Gymnopthalmata of Charleston Har- 

 bor," Prof. McCrady describes and figures a new diphyozoid, which 

 he names Eudoxia alata, and a new Diphyes, D. pusilla. His Eudoxia 

 alata seems to be the same as E. Lessonii of Huxley. This animal, ac- 

 cording to this prominent English naturalist, is the diphyozoid of D. 

 appendiculata^ a synonym of Leuckart's D. acuminata. The mention 

 which Prof. McCrady makes of Diphyes piisilla is too short to be of ser- 

 vice in distinguishing it from Mediterranean Diphyidse. A figure of a 

 Diphyes acuminata from Villefranche may have some interest, especially 

 as its diphyozoid, Eudoxia Lessonii^ has been found by me at Newport. 

 Leuckart mentions in his Siphonophoren von Nizza an Epihulia {Galeo- 

 laria), given him by Philippi, and taken from the coast of Greenland. 



To the Siphonophorous fauna of eastern coasts of North America* I 

 can add a new member of the Agalmidse, probably the same as Sars's 

 Af/almopsis elegans, and the two diphyozoids, Eudoxia Lessonii and Diplo- 

 physa inermis. There is a great diversity of opinion among naturalists 

 what Diplophysa is. All seem to be united in the opinion that it is a 

 diphyozoid, but there is an unanswered question of what Calycophore it 

 is the fragment. I mention a few of the opinions. Gegenbaur,t who 

 first described the form, seems to think its resemblance not very dis- 

 tinct from Erscea truncata of Will. On page 366 of his Neue Beitrdge 

 he says that " Sie (Diplophyspe) entsprechen in der Sculptur der Diplo- 

 physen-gattung Praya." Praya is probably the same as Erscea. Huxley 

 (Oceanic Hydrozoa, p. 66) says that Dijolophysa inermis has some resem- 

 blance to the diphyozoid Cncuhalus described by Quoy and Gaimard, but 

 says he was unable to arrive at any definite opinion as to what animals 

 were included by the French voyagers in their genera Cymha and Cucu- 

 halus. 



* My observations on American Siphonophores were made in the laboratory of Mr. 

 Agassiz, at Newport, R. I. 



t Beiti-ac'e zur naheren Kenntniss der Schwimmpolypen (Siphonoplioren). 



