no Miscellanea. [Vol. II, 



Zooecia irregularly quadrate with large pores over the sur- 

 face ; the zooecia are divided by raised ridges ; the aperture 

 is surrounded by a thick border with an elevation at each 

 side and one below the aperture. Triangular avicularium 

 to the side of the aperture, but only to a few zooecia. 

 Ovicell raised, globular, with a small sunk area perforated 

 by a few large pores. 



This is in many respects like Lcpralia {Eschar oides) occlusa. 

 Busk, but the zooecia are much smaller and the avicularia 

 have a different shape. The oral aperture is similar in 

 shape, but smaller. The ovicell is qute the same. 



Possibl}^ it is a marked variety of Lcpralia occlusa, or an an- 

 cestor." 



Corrections as to the identity of Indian Phylactoi,^mata. 

 — In a recent note on a Lophopus from the Kumaon Himalayas 

 [Rec. Ind. Mus., i, p. 145), I named it L. lendenfeldi var. hima- 

 layanus. Having now had an opportunity, thanks to the kindness 

 of Mr. R. Kirkpatrick, of examining a co-type of Ridley's Aus- 

 tralian species, and having found numerous examples of H3^att's 

 " Pectinatella " carteri in a lake in the Western Ghats of Bombay, 

 I am convinced that the Kumaon form is not specifically identical 

 with L. lendenfeldi but allied to Hyatt's species, which I still see no 

 reason to separate from the genus Lophopus. Whether " himalaya- 

 nus " is a temporary phase or a local race of the latter species it is 

 impossible to say at present, but the statoblasts of my specimens of 

 the Kumaon form without hooks are certainly mature. Another 

 identification in my former paper on the freshwater polyzoa of India 

 (Journ. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, vol. iii, No. 2, 1907, p. 88) proves to be 

 incorrect, viz., that of Plumatella repens of Linne. What exactly 

 was the form originally so named is a little uncertain, but it is im- 

 possible to regard as absolutely trust worth}^ any identification in the 

 genus Plumatella that is not vouched for in Allman's monograph 

 (1856), unless the species has been described since that date. In any 

 case, the common species in Calcutta is not, as I formerly thought, 

 what Allman calls P. repens, Linn., but P. fruticosa , Allman, which 

 Kraepelin regards as a variet}' of his own P. princeps, but which 

 seems to me to be a constant and distinct form worthy of specific 

 rank. I have not found the true P. repeats according to Allman 

 as yet in India. The examination of a considerable number of 

 European specimens, which I owe to the kindness of Dr. F. Harmer 

 and Messrs. R, Kirkpatrick, W. Evans and C. F. Rousselet, and of a 

 great deal of Indian material collected by myself at different seasons 

 and in different conditions, convinces me that a safe distinction be- 

 tween the two forms may be based not onl^^ on the proportions of 

 the stato blast but also on the shape of the stomach, a feattire well 

 shown in Allman's beautiful plates. P. fruticosa occasionally enters 

 into an " Alcyonella " phase in Calcutta, and changes into Allman's 

 P. coralloides when surrounded by a freshwater sponge. 



N. Ann AND ale. 



