ATLANT. DEEP-SEA EXPED. 1910. VOL. III.] 



CTENOPHORA. 



The rather considerable number of catches of this 

 species shows that it is found all over the Atlantic — a 

 result which is, however, by no means surprising, in view 

 of the fact that it has a cosmopolitan distribution. That 

 the species was not taken in the open Atlantic by the 

 Plankton-Expedition may probably be due to the appara- 

 tus used by that Expedition. 



Concerning the bathymetrical distribution the catches 

 of the "Michael Sars" do not give any reliable results. 

 The number of specimens taken is not nearly large enough 

 to warant conclusions from the differential catches. When 

 there is f. i. one specimen in the surface haul and 2 

 specimens in the haul with 1500 m. wire, there is not 

 at all sufficient evidence that the two latter have not 

 been taken also at the surface. 



4. Beroe Forskali M. Edw. 



Station 88. (45° 26' N, 25° 45' W. 1k /t 1910.) 



41. 1 m. net; 200 m. wire; 1 large 

 specimen. 



The specimen is in a rather fragmentary condition, 

 but otherwise so well preserved, that the determination 

 is beyound doubt. 



In the "Ingolf" Ctenophora (p. 92) I expressed my 

 conviction that this species would prove to occur also in 

 the Atlantic, not only in the Mediterranean and the Indo- 

 Pacific Oceans, from which it was hitherto alone recorded. 

 That my suggestion was correct, is definitely proved 

 herewith, while the two Atlantic localities given in the 

 work quoted could not put the matter beyond doubt, 

 being founded on old, poorly preserved specimens, which 

 could not be identified with full certainty. Otherwise the 

 species is now seen to be abundant also in the West 

 India Sea and along the U. S. Atlantic coast, as far North 

 as Chesapeake Bay. I conclude this from A. G. Mayer's 

 statement of Beroe ovata in his "Ctenophores of the 

 Atlantic Coast of North America" (p. 51). It is evident 

 that the species which he designates as Beroe ovata is 

 the same as Beroe Forskali. When A. G. Mayer thus 

 maintains Beroe ovata as distinct from B. cucumis, while 

 I, in my contemporaneously with his work published 

 "Ingolf" Ctenophora, maintain that B. ovata cannot be 

 distinguished from B. cucumis, these two statements are 

 realy not contradictory, because the B. ovata of A. G. 

 Mayer is quite a different species from that called by 

 that name by Chun and other workers, viz. B. Forskali, 

 which nobody would think of confounding with B. cucumis. 



