102 On the Genus Amathia of Lamouroux, 



ramis elongatis, ramosis, tenuissimis, conglomerationibus 

 cellularum ovalihus, distinctis, precatoriis, cellulis subse- 

 junctis, aliquoties unilateralibus. 



Lamx. Encyclop., p. 45 ; Sericdaria, p., Blainv. op. cit. 

 p. 476. Found on the coast of Brittany. Desh. and M. Ed., 

 loc. cit. 



A. semi-convoluta. — Lamouroux. — Encyclop., p. 44. A. 

 ramosa, capillacea, ramis sparsis conglomerationibus cel- 

 lula^rum longissimis, distinctis convolutis veV semi-con- 

 volutis. 



Seriolario;, semi-convoluta, M. Ed. and Desh. loc. cit. 

 They add — Hab. Medit. Sea. This species establishes the 

 passage between two species of Serialaria. The stems and 

 the ramifications are filiform or capillary; the groups of cells 

 are very distinct although near, and the cells themselves 

 are all the same length. 



A. australis, nobis, Proc. Roy. Soc, N.S.W., loc. cit. Poly- 

 zoary, with the internodes completely occupied by 7 to 10 

 tubular cells, adnate to one another perpendicular to the 

 frond, curved and lengthening towards the end of the series. 

 Internodes serial or giving off two others at right angles. 

 Two long ligulate processes proceeding apparently from the 

 terminal cell-mouth of each internode, and about twice their 

 length. Mouth of the cell somewhat crescentic, with a 

 thickened margin. 



A seaweed, Guichen Bay, S.A., of a light brown colour, 

 and very like a mass of aphides, branches corrugated, and 

 constricted at the internodes. Some of the cells have a 

 conical cap. Nearly all the cells in a double series. Seria- 

 laria oMstralis, nobis, loc. cit. 



Amathia Bicornis, nobis. Op. cit. p. 84, as Sevialaria 

 spiralis. P. dichotomously branched with clusters of cells 

 in series of 20 to 24, disposed spirally round the axis of the 

 branches. Cells attached by their bases only, nearly four 

 times as long as wide, each provided with two divergent 

 hollow spirals half as long as the cell, 



Darker in colour than the preceding — Amathia, Woodsii, 

 Goldstein, Proc. Micr. Soc. Vic, 1879. 



It would seem from the confusion between the works of 

 Lamouroux and Lamarck, and the identity of some of their 

 names, as if there had been some misunderstanding between 

 them. It is, however, pretty certain that Lamarck does not 

 acknowledge Lamouroux's assistance, or admit that he was 

 using his names. This is all the more strange, if we remem- 



