1004 SIR C. ELIOT ON THE nudibranchs [Dec. 11, 



Doris funebris Kelaart. 



= Kentrodoris anmdigera Bergh. 



= K. maculosa (Cuv.). 

 One radula is preserved, with a formula of about 22 x 25.0.25. 

 The innermost teeth are smaller than the others and much as 

 figured by Bergh. 



Label : D. bellicosa 32. 



VrdhahXy — Discodorisfragilis (A. ifc H.). 

 Two radulee and labial armatures, labelled as above, seem really 

 to belong to D.foxigilis, for two specimens from which the ra dulse 

 have been extracted are numbered 32 and distinctly marked as 

 D. fragilis. Alder and Hancock's remarks {I. c. p. 119) suggest 

 that they originally registered the animal as D. bellicosa, and then 

 came to the conclusion that it was distinct. 



The labial armature consists of two clearly-cut and symmetrical 

 plates, somewhat wing-shaped, and resembling those of Disc, 

 boholiensis figured by Bergh (in Semper's Reisen, Heft xvii. 

 pi. dxxxvii. fig. 28). They are yellow and composed of a thatch 

 of straw-like elements, which are sometimes sinuous, especially at 

 the thin ends of the plates. 



The two radulffi consist of about 30 and 40 rows respectively, 

 and the smaller contains about 55 teeth on either side of the 

 rhachis. The larger is obscured by the medium in which it is 

 mounted. The teeth are hamate, rather erect, and moderately 

 stout ; they increase up to the middle of the half row. The last 

 4-5 are lower, but not degraded or denticulate. The innermost 

 teeth of the two sides meet and almost cross one another, so that 

 the rhachis must be regai'ded as really narrow ; but it appears to 

 be wide, because the teeth near the centre (5-6 on each side) are 

 set much more widely apar-t from each other than those which 

 follow, and are small with low hooks. Possibly this part of the 

 radula has been artificially stretched. 



Disc, fragilis is probably identical with some of the subsequently 

 described species, and the specific name has priority (1864) over 

 a,ll those given by Abraham, Bergh, and later writers, but must 

 yield to hellicosa (1857) if the two prove to be identical. Alder 

 and Hancock's statement of the differences does not amount to 

 much, but, on the other hand, there is little resemblance between 

 their plate and Kelaart's. 



Doris pardalis A. & H. 



= Discodoris pojvdalis (A. h H.). 



Labial armature yellow, consisting of rods not jointed, fairly 

 straight but with a slightly undulated outline. The armature 

 was apparently composed of two separate halves oiiginally, but is 

 now somewhat confused. 



The radula is also confused, but consists of about 28 rows, 

 containing from 12 to 30 teeth on each side of the rhachis. The 



