i']2 N. Annandale : Thi'ee Indian Phylactolxrnata. [VOL. II, 



mature. The arrangement of the zooecia in these two forms agrees 

 more closely with that found in L. crystallinus than with that found 

 in L.lendenfeldi, which is further distinguished by the comparatively 

 small size of its statoblast. By the kindness of Mr. R. Kirkpatrick 



Fig. 3. — L. carteri: statoblast from Igatpuri I.ake, W. Ghats, x 70. 



I have lately been able to examine a specimen of this Australian 

 form, regarding which I am therefore in a position to express a 

 more definite opinion than I was when I wrote my former note on 

 the Himalayan form {Rec. Ind. Mus., i, p. 145), in which I stated 

 that the two were probably identical specifically. Even in 

 L. lendenfeldi, judging from an examination of this specimen, cells 

 are probably absent from the gelatinous investment in the living 

 organism, although in specimens preserved in spirit those of the 

 inner layer are apt to be forced out of their natural position. 

 This is certainly the casein the two Indian forms and in L. crystalli- 

 nus, in all of which this artificial phenomenon occurs. The cells 



Fig. 4. — L. himalayanus: extremity of statoblast, x 240. 



of the inner layer, however, are distinctly larger in the Indian and 

 Australian forms than they are in L. crystallinus, and are appa- 

 rently more easily displaced. In Plumatclla punctata not only have 

 these cells all the characters of its genus, but the stiff er consis- 

 tency of the cuticle, swollen though it is. prevents them from being 

 forced into it artificially. 



As regards the generic position of L. carteri, I have already 

 .stated {Rec. Ind. Mus., i, p. 147) that I see no reason to separate it 

 from the genus to which Carter assigned it. It must be confessed, 



