92 JOURNAL Of CONCHOLOGY, VOL. 12, NO. 3, JULY, I907. 



pletely retracted and tri- or quadri-pinnate. They are of a pellucid 

 brown, the outermost axes (but not tlie main axis) are black. The 

 anal papilla is rather tall, and its edge is not crenulate. The foot is 

 white or brownish-white, without markings. The tentacles are distinct 

 though not large, forming a sort of veil over the mouth. 



The animal is very soft but active in its movements. Its excrements 

 are a bright reddish-yellow, and, as a soft orange coloured compound 

 ascidian was found on the rocks over which it was crawling, this is 

 probably the food of the Doridopsis. The spawn is of a dirty white, 

 disposed in a single straggling coil. 



As preserved the specimens are soft and slimy. The intestines are 

 purplish-grey but there is black pigment in the buccal part and here 

 and there in the viscera, especially the mesenteries. The nervous 

 system and the anterior portion of the digestive tract are according to 

 the type of Doridopsis not of Doriopsilla and agree with Hancock's 

 account of Doridopsis geinmacea. The portion of the alimentary tube 

 which lies in front of the buccal ganglia has comparatively thin walls 

 and a large lumen, whereas that which lies between the buccal ganglia 

 and the liver has thick spongy walls and a very small lumen. There 

 is a large double gland under the mouth parts. The pericardial 

 lamellse are well developed. The liver is very distinctly bifid behind. 

 The vas deferens consists of two portions, one thick and elaborately 

 coiled, the other thinner and simpler. In spite of repeated investiga- 

 tion no spines or other armature were found anywhere in the genitalia. 

 The spermatotheca is stalked, large, globular and full of white 

 contents ; the spermatocyst moderately large and pear shaped. 



I think this form is the Doridopsis geiiuiiacea of Alder & Hancock. 

 The external features as well as the anatomy agree with their 

 description and the coloration is very similar. Neither in these 

 specimens nor in A. & H.'s type specimens could I find any hooks or 

 other armature on the male genitalia and I think that as far as these 

 Japanese specimens are concerned its absence must be regarded as 

 certain, as the examination was thorough. Bergh could not find such 

 an armature in a large specimen of Doridopsis gibbulosa and I have 

 been unable to find it in specimens of Doridopsis maiiunosa from New 

 Zealand. Both of these are similar to Doridopsis gcmniacea in general 

 external and internal features, though differing in coloration. So, 

 perhaps, there may be a subgeneric group of tuberculate forms 

 without the usual armature. 



The specimen described by Bergh (I.e.) as Doridopsis denisoni and 

 identified by him with Doridopsis geinmacea had a distinct armature. 

 But the identity seems to me doubtful. It is not clear from the 

 descriptions of Bergh and Angas or from Angas's figure that Dori- 

 dopsis denisoni has large compound tubercles. 



