REVISED LIST OF MARINE ALGJE. 89 



is always excessively thin and entirely destitute of mark- 

 ings as far as is shewn by the highest powers at my 

 disposal, though it is probable that under exceptionally 

 good conditions as to light and with still more powerful 

 objectives, the characteristic markings of these families 

 might be detected. But the interesting fact is that the 

 contents of some of the cells are to be found floating free, 

 destitute of any siliceous envelope, and (apparently) in a 

 living condition. This is frequently the case with deep 

 sea species belonging to the allied genus Rhizosolenia. I 

 also noticed detached "hones" of Chcetoceros, and fronds 

 which I should refer to Fragilaria striatula, Lyngb. 

 Besides diatoms there are several other marine algae, but 

 mostly in a fragmentary condition. There is a Bhizo- 

 clonvum, probably B. riparium, Harv. and what I take to 

 be fragments of an epiphytic Endocladia." 



Mr. Bennett expresses a desire to see further samples 

 of "foul" water, and I take this opportunity of making his 

 desire known, in the hopes that members of the L.M.B. 

 Committee may be able to send him material in a fresh 

 condition. 



NOTE. — In using the nomenclature and classification 

 employed by Messrs. Holmes and Batters (loc. cit.), I 

 have thought it best to give their authorities for specific 

 nomenclature also. I do so, however, with great reluc- 

 tance and for the following reasons. In the paper referred 

 to (p. 64) these authors say: — "The authority given for 

 the name of a species is in every case that of the botanist 

 who first employed the name as it now stands, not that of 

 the author who first described the species under another 

 name." Thus, to take an instance, JJrospora bangioides ap- 

 pears in their list with the authority "Holmes et Batters." 

 This species was, I believe, first described and published 



