256 TRANSACTIONS LIVERPOOL BIOLOGICAL SOCIBTY. 
Now the points insisted on as distinguishing Depastrum 
from Carduella were these:—that while in both the ten- 
tacles are arranged in 8 groups round the margin of the 
dise oral surface of bell or umbrella) yet in Depas- 
trum the tentacles are very numerous, and are arranged 
in each group In several rows or series, one within another, 
and further that they spring from the margin of the 
octagonal disc or from without it, but that in Carduella 
there are only about 5 tentacles in each group arranged 
in a single serves and arising completely within the margin 
of the circular disc. Further in Carduella there is a single 
tentacle (primary tentacle of Haeckel, corresponding to the 
marginal anchors of Haliclystus) in each interval between 
the groups of other tentacles; this does not seem to have 
been observed by Gosse in Depastrwm. Clark pointed out 
that, according to the figures and description of Sars, con- 
firmed and extended by his own examination of the 
specimens sent to him by the latter, the Norwegian species 
when adult has the tentacles arranged in several rows 
(3 or 4), but that the younger individuals have at first 
only one row and later two. Further he pointed out that 
Allman was in error in asserting that the Orkney form 
always had its tentacles in one row only, for some of those 
sent to him, being presumably older than those described 
by Allman, had more than one row. . He accordingly con- 
cluded that Carduwella as defined by Allman was merely 
the young form of the Lucernaria cyathiformis of Sars. 
With regard to this pomt, the examination of a large 
series of specimens at Port Erin has amply confirmed the 
conclusions of Clark. Now as to the Depastrum of 
Gosse, Clark inserts it provisionally as a distinct genus, 
but at the same time he gives some very good reasons 
for regarding it also as identical with Lucernaria cyath- 
formis, Sars. The difference in the number and arrange- 
