18 98-1902. No. 8.] BRYOZOA. l9 



zocecia of hexagona having no pores in the frontal wall, while the 

 opercuUim also exhibits a somewhat different form to that in condylala. 



33. Schizoporella prodactst, Packard. 



PI. II, figs. 19-21. 



1888. Smittia produda, Hixcks, Polyzoa of the St. Lawrence. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 

 Ser. 6, vol. 3, p. 430, PI. 21, fig. 2. 



July 5, 1901, the Sound, incrusting stones; July 18, 1901, the winter 

 haven, incrusting stones. 



HiNCKs (1. c.) has described forms of Smittia producta from the 

 St. Lawrence, very carefully, and judging from this description, I think 

 there can be no doubt that it is the species that I scraped off stones 

 from the above-named places. And as Hincks has made it very 

 probable that his forms from the St. Lawrence correspond with Lepralia 

 producta, Packard, from the coasts of Labrador, it must be right to re- 

 tain Packard's name. I have little to add to Hinck's description. The 

 frontal wall of the zocecia was furnished with large pores (fig. 19), and 

 in young specimens an arrangement of the interzocEcial pore-tubes might 

 be seen on the basal wall similar to that in Schizoporella condylata. 

 Judging from the shape of the oral aperture and the operculum (fig. 21), 

 it would seem natural to refer the species to the genus Schizo- 

 porella. In specimens from Greenland (the „Valorous", 1875), for 

 which I am indebted to the kindness of Canon Norman, I saw 

 a confirmation of Hincks's statement that in young zocecia the lower 

 margin of the oral aperture is cut off almost straight. This character 

 points to the genus Eschara [Lepralia). 



34. Schizoporella bidenkapi, Nordgaard, n. sp. 



PI. II, figs. 22-24. 



August 4, 1900, Sjopolse Ness, 15-25 ft., incrusting mussel shells. 



Although the oral aperture differs greatly from the typical form of 

 the aperture in the genus Schizoporella, I have nevertheless referred the 

 forms in question to this genus. There is only dried material consisting 

 of a greyish white incrustation on fragments of mussel shells. The 

 zoarium consisted of large zocecia, whose frontal wall was thickly per- 

 forated with pores, of which the marginal ones differed from the others 

 in being somewhat larger (fig. 22). The colonies were highly calified, 

 and there being no marked depressions between the zocecia, gave the 

 colonies a fairly even appearance on the surface. The oral aperture 



