= 
bO 
wo 
bo 
Q 
ur 
Hemiaulus Ehb. 
44. Hi. Heibergii Cl. Cl. Diat. Java. tab. 1, fig. 4. 
KKm, KKt (2 samples). 
Area: Japan. China, Indian Ocean, Arafura, Malay Archipelago, Tropical 
Atlantic. 
Terpsinoé Ehb. 
45. TT. americana Ralfs. A.S. Atl. tab. CC, fig. 9. 
Solitary in a sample from K Cg. 
Area: Venice, Florida, Neuse River, Cape of Good Hope, Yokohama, 
Australia, Samoa. 
Rutilaroideae. 
Rutilaria Grev. 
46. R. recens Cl. Cl. New. Diat. tab. IV, fig.57a &b. V.H. Syn. 
tab. CV, fig. 9. Tab. nostr. I, fig. 5. 
KKm, KMn—CLt, KS (5 samples). 
Area: Galepagos. 
As it may be seen of my figure compared with those quoted above 
by Cleve and Van Heurck the present form is somewhat more elegant. 
Cleve (lc. p. 19) figures and mentions some ,strongly marked puncta‘, 
which are not very conspicuous in Van Heurck’s figure and that I have 
not seen in my specimens. Van Heurck thinks that the somewhat 
unsymmetrical sculpture shown in his figure ,ferait croire 4 une Euodiée“. 
Cleve whose figures do not show any unsymmetrical sculpture however 
points out that his Ruéilaria recens is ,very allied to the genus Cymato- 
sira Grun., of which the only known species C. Lorenziana Grun. has 
also marginal bristles‘. As my form do not possess ,strongly marked 
puncta‘, i. e. the character which should entitle its affinity to Rutilaria, 
and as it does not show an unsymmetrical sculpture, | am most inclined 
to think it allied to Cymatosira Grun. 
B. Pennatae. 
Tabellarieae. 
Rhabdonema Kiz. 
47, KR. adriaticum Ktz. V.H. Syn. tab. LIV, figs. 11—13. 
Common in the samples (25) from K Kt. 
Area: ubiquitous. 
18* 
