1906.] OF SOUTnEUN INDIA AND CEYLON. 649 



(even if proved to be the rule) can exclude it from the genus. 

 PI. variegata Bergh has a labial ai^mature. On the other hand, 

 the dorsal papillje are a mai'ked point of difference. In any case, 

 the form seems to be intermediate between Platydoris and 

 Aster onotus, and to have little affinity to Discodoris. 



Doris exanthemata Kelaart. 



(Kelaart, 1. c. I. p. 300.) 



'i = Aster onotus heniprichi Ehrenberg. 



Hancock has written on Kelaart's drawing " D. mmiritiana 

 Q. & G. ? " This latter species is identified with Asteronotus 

 ciespitosus, and Kelaart's drawing, more than his description, 

 supports the idea that the animal is the common Asteronotus 

 of the Indo- Pacific. Whether there is really more than one 

 species is doubtful. If there is only one, the name A. hempricM 

 Ehrenberg has priority. Kelaart's statement that D. exanthemata 

 is " semi-gelatinous and . . . when dead rapidly dissolves and 

 cannot be preserved in spii'its " is against this identification. 

 Asteronotus may perhaps be compared to a stiff solid jelly, but it 

 can be preserved without difficulty. 



The statement that tlie spawn is of a beautiful I'ed colour 

 is interesting. I have found this red spawn and Asteronotus 

 in the same locality at Zanzibar, but cannot prove by observation 

 the connection between the two. 



Kelaart had a strange dislike of this animal, which he thinks 

 " gives one more the idea of a horrid disease than the charms of a 

 sea-nymph." But Asteronotus^ though not particularly beautiful 

 either in shape or colour, is not a revolting object. Yery fair 

 representations of it are given by Bergh (Siboga, pi. i. fig. 5, 

 and Notes from the Leyden Museum, 1887, pi. vi. fig. 9) and 

 Eliot (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1903, ii. pi. xxxiv. fig. 5). 



Kentrodoris Bergh. 



The Kentrodorids are perhaps nearly related to Jorunna. They 

 a,re also, especially K. maculosa {cmnidigera), allied to TJiordisa and 

 Diaidtda, from which they differ chiefly in having the verge armed 

 with a spine. Only three species have been described, all from 

 the Indian Ocean : — 



1. K. rid)escens B. 



2. K. gigas B. 



3. K. maculosa (Cuv.) 



=^K. annuligera B. 



Kentrodoris maculosa (Cuv.). 



(Cuvier, Ann. du Mus. iv. 1804, p. 466-7. Quoy & Gaimard, 



Astrolabe, 1832, Zoologie, tome ii. p. 249, 

 = Doris funebr is Kelaart, Ann. ISTat. Hist. 3rd series, vol. iii. 



1859, p. 293 ; and A. & H. 1. c. p. 122. 

 — Kentrodoris amiidigera Bergh.) 



