518 ME. E. W. SHANN ON 



Genus DENDRONEPnTHYA Kiikenthal. 



1791-97. Alcyonmm Esper, Pflanzenthiere, pp. 49, 50, tab. 16. 

 1834. Nee Spongodes Lesson, Illustrations cle Zoologie, vol. ii. 



part 2, p. 89. 

 1834. Nephthya (pars) Elirenberg. 

 1846. Spoggodia (pars) Dana, p. 625. 

 1857. S'poggodes (pars) Milne-Edwards, p. 127. 

 1862. Spoggodes (pars), Morchellana Gray, in Proc. Zool. Soc. 



London, p. 27. 

 1877. Spongodes (pars) Klnnzinger, pp. 34, 35. 

 1889. Spongodes (pars) Wright & Studer. 



1895. Spongodes (pars) Holm, p. 16. 



1896. Spongodes (pars) Kiikenthal, p. 97. 

 1899. S2>ongodes (pars) May. 



1905. Dendronephthya Kiikenthal, Zool. Jahrb. xxi. p. 526. 



The genus Sj)ongodes was founded by Lesson (1834) on the 

 type Sp. celosia, and for many years woikers in the field of the 

 Nephthyidfe found no difficulty in discriminating between 

 Spo7igodes Lesson and NepMliya Savigny. I have endeavoured 

 to show in my section on the genus Neplithya that as the nvimber 

 of species of the above-mentioned genera increased it became 

 more and more difficult to draw a hard-and-fast line between 

 them ; further, that this fact became manifest when, in 1889, 

 Wright and Studer described a specimen as Spongodes nephihycB- 

 formis, which was subsequently relegated to the genus Nephthya, 

 and, indeed, shown to be identical with JSf. chabrolii, the type of 

 that genus, A new distinctive feature was required : such a 

 feature was discovered by Holm and applied in a practical form, 

 by Kiikenthal. The feature in question is the arrangement of 

 the polyps upon the stem, and its application has already been 

 mentioned above. Kiikenthal's (1896) definition of the emended 

 genus Spongodes is as follows : — " Polypenstock baumartig veiiis- 

 telt, vinterer Stammteil nackt. Die Polypen sind in Biindeln 

 vereinigt oder stehen vereinzelt." Under the genus Spongodes 

 thus defined, Kiikenthal included as subgenera Sp>ongodia and 

 Spongodes ; he fui-ther subdivided the latter into three groups, 

 namely, Glomeratfe, Umbellatfe, and Divaricatee. May (1899) 

 and others adopted this classification ; and so the matter stood 

 until the year 1905, when Kiikenthal published the second 

 part of his " Revision of the Nephthyidfe." In this paper was 

 inti-oduced the division of the time-honoured genus Spongodes 

 Less, into the two new genersi, Bendt^onephthya &nd Stereonephthya, 

 which has provoked such a stonn of criticism. It must be 

 remembered, however, that the group Sj)ongodes " Spicatse," and 

 with it the original type Sp. celosia^ had already been relegated 

 to the genus NepTiihya ; so that the genus Spongodes, as then 

 accepted, no longer retained its ancient prestige ; moreover, since 

 the genera Neplithya and Spongodes were shown ^o be synony- 

 mous, Kiikenthal was justified by the International Rules of 

 Zoological ISTomenclature (Art. 28) in retaining the older name— 



