20 A MONOGRAPH OE THE TERTIARY POLYZOA OE VICTORIA. 



5. C. prcetenuis, n.sp. PI. II., fig. 20. 



Zooecia small, very slender ; a very narrow vitta on each side extending the 

 whole length of the zooeciiim ; lateral processes small, at the upper angles of the 

 zooecia, with a minute avicularium opening outwards ; thyrostome subcircular, the 

 lower margin straight and slightly thickened. Posterior surface smooth. 



M.C. 



Allied to the recent C. venusta, hut I have no doubt distinct. I have only 

 seen the geminate pah of zooecia figured. 



6. C. sacculata, Busk sp. PL II., fig. 21. 



Catenicella sacculata, Busk, C.P., Pt. I., p. 12. 



Zooecia narrow, elongated, smooth ; a long marginal vitta extending almost 

 the whole length of the zooecium on either side ; thyrostome subcircular, the lower 

 margin straighter and with a slightly rounded marsupium-like elevation immediately 

 below ; lateral processes small with an avicularium opening outwards. 



M.C. Also living in the South Atlantic. 



This is undoubtedly identical with the C. sacculata dredged by the Challenger 

 Expedition off the coast of Brazil, and it is certainly a good species. 



Claviporella, McG. 



Zooecia small; thyrostome narrow, arched above, contracted below and 

 extending downwards as a deep notch ; lateral processes various, usually supporting 

 large avicularia which may, however, be aborted or absent. 



1. C. vespertilio, n.sp. PL II., fig. 22. 



Zooecia small, rounded, projecting forwards, produced below into a long 

 calcareous tube and expanded above into large wing-like lateral processes. 



S.P.; M.C. 



I am very doubtful of the position of this species. In the Muddy Creek 

 specimen the thyrostome is small, contracted below so as to form a large sinus, and 

 the lateral processes are very long and sharply pointed. In that from Schnapper 

 Point the thyrostome is larger, without contraction and straight below, the difference 

 being obviously owing to the latter having been worn. Pending the discovery of 

 other specimens I refer it doubtfully to the present genus, believing it not unlikely 

 that it may not be a member of the Catenicellidoe at all. 



