BRYOZOA OF THE CAPE VERDE ISLANDS. 35 



without finding reason for change of opinion. Apparently Busk did not 

 figure the specimen he was describing — in fact, the figure is from a badly 

 preserved specimen; whereas he had in his collection specimens, so named, of 

 what I have identified as L. novce-selandice. It is a small form in which the 

 zooecial tubes of the much raised inner zooecia of the rays meet or nearly 

 meet in the centre, forming when there is no ovicell a very depressed inverted 

 cone. These have a raised flat ovicell * over the centre with most minute 

 perforations and a bordering ridge ; besides the cancelli are frequently 

 formed with bars across, as in L. radiata, Hincks, and, although there are some 

 "pin-head" spines in the cancelli and zooecia, they are not very frequent, 

 whereas in L. Holdsworthii the round cancelli are very regular, with very 

 numerous large pin-head spines. In my specimens of L. Holdsworthii, in 

 two cases, there are hollow grooves in the interradial spaces, and in other 

 places on the central wall, which seem to relate to the formation of an ovicell 

 such as that figured by Harmer (lot: cit. fig. 11). 



I have a large number of Lichenoporce with ovicells, and, when writing my 

 short paper f on them, much time was spent in comparing the Natural 

 History Museum types and specimens. Since then I have had some additions 

 to my collection, and the Museum has received several valuable collections, 

 such as Busk's and Hincks's, but on the whole it seems that what I then said 

 is supported. My paper was written at a time when hardly anyone took 

 any notice of the ovicells, in fact they were generally ignored ; but certain 

 types of ovicells were indicated, and whether the identifications will 

 ultimately stand was a matter of secondary importance, though I am unaware 

 of any reasons for changing the names then used. I showed that there 

 was the flat type of ovicell as in L. novce-zelandice, the raised, rounded, 

 dome-shaped type with trabecula3 over the wall as in L. echinata, McGr., 

 and L. victoriensis, Waters, and, lastly, the ovicell spreading up to the rays 

 as in L. californica (Busk) Waters. I stated that this should be considered as 

 the species of Busk, as there was some doubt as to d'Orbigny's description, 

 and Harmer, in calling attention to the biserial rays of Busk not being- 

 indicated by d'Orbigny, does not seem to have remembered what I had 

 already said. However, the question of uncertainty through Busk's species 

 being bi- to multiserial has no importance now, as I have a specimen from 

 Western Port, Victoria, with uniserial rays and an ovicell as figured J by 

 me, and another from the same locality with biserial rays and a similar 

 ovicell. The question of uni- and biserial rays has not only broken down 



* " Bry. New South Wales, etc.," Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 5, vol. xx. (1887) pi. 7. 

 fig. 8. 



f " On the Ovicells of some Lkhenopora," Joui-n. Linn. Soc, Zool. vol. xx. (18S8) 

 pp. 280-285. 



\ " Bry. New South Wales, etc.," I. c. p. 261, pi. 7. fig. 8. 



3* 



