ON THE BRITISH SPECIES OF OBISIA. 119 



denticulata. The form of the zooecia is very similar to that found 

 in C. ramosa; but, on the contrary, the ovioells do not agree with 

 those of the latter. If the left side of fig. 5 represents a young 

 ovioell (probably somewhat broken), the ovioells are even less like 

 those of C. ramosa in their early than in their fully developed con- 

 dition. Is this form possibly identical with the one described by 

 Stimpson (21) under the name of C. cribrariaP 

 (7) HiNCKS.— P. 423. 



The statement that the ovicells of C. denticnlata have "a 

 tubular orifice at the top " was possibly made after an examination of 

 C. ramosa ; especially as, on the same page of Hincks's work, occurs 

 C. denticnlata, var. o (to which pi. Ivi, fig. 9, presumably 

 belongs) ; and there can be little doubt that this is really C. ramosa. 



C. denticnlata, var. tenuis. — 



(24) ViSELius. — " Cat. of the Polyzoa . . . Willem Barents," 'Nied. Arch, 

 f. Zool. Supplementb.,' i, 1881-3. 

 This form is said to correspond closely with Hincks's unnamed variety 

 just referred to. It is, however, impossible to accept tenuis as a 

 specific name, since the name C. tenuis had been applied by Mac- 

 Gillivray to an Australian species before the appearance of the paper 

 by Vigelius (see F. McCoy, " Prodromus of the Zool. of Victoria," 

 'Decade' iv, pi. xxxix, Melbourne, 1879. 



? C. fistulosa.— 



(6) Busk, (non Heller),— P. 5, pi. vi a, figs. I, 2. 



Even if this form is identical with the species under consideration 

 it is better to drop Busk's name, since the specific name fistulosa 

 was originally applied by Heller to a form which is clearly not the one 

 described by Busk (see Waters, No. 25). 



Through the kindness of Mr. B.. Kirkpatrick I have been enabled to 

 refer, at the British Museum, to a specimen of the form described by 

 Busk ; and I have also to thank Mr. Kirkpatrick for having subsequently 

 given me further information on the same subject. The specimen in 

 question is labelled " C. fistulosa, Hell., locality unknown. Lesina ? " 

 I am informed by Mr. Kirkpatrick that the label is in Mr. Busk's hand- 

 writing, with the possible exception of the last word ; and that the 

 specimen is probably really from the Mediterranean. 



The specimen in the British Museum is even more like my own 

 species than is obvious from Busk's description, which, in Mr. Kirk- 

 patrick's opinion, was probably taken from that specimen. As many as 

 five branches may come off from the same internode, and some of them 

 higher than the sixth zooecium, which, according to Busk, is their upper 

 limit. The ovicells, of which only two could be satisfactorily 

 examined, agree fairly well with those of the Plymouth form. Their 



