SCOTTISH ROTIFERS, COLLECTED BY THE LAKE SURVEY. 193 



the long period of fourteen days, appears never to have given very good opportunity 

 for study. 



The original specimen was found among moss from roadside, near Bognor, Sussex. 

 Some years later another example was found in moss from Buckinghamshire. In 1897 

 a third example appeared in moss from Spitsbergen. On this occasion Mr Bryce 

 observed the dental formula 2/2, and gives the measurement of the extended animal as 

 0347 mm., but adds nothing further to his original description. In the plate 

 accompanying the description the jaws are figured with two teeth in each. 



Weber (8) found two examples of the species, in very bad condition. His descrip- 

 tion (p. 349) is almost identical with Bryce's, and he adds nothing of importance 

 except the dental formula 2/2. He says that the lamellae are broad. 



I can find no other record of the species, which would seem to indicate that it is 

 a rare animal, as such an extraordinary creature would readily attract attention. In 

 March 1904 I first found it in moss from the shore of Loch Ness, near Fort- Augustus, 

 and subsequently it has appeared pretty frequently in Scotland, permitting fuller 

 studies to be made of it. 



There will hardly, I think, be any doubt as to the identity of the animal found in 

 Scotland, if the figures here given (Plate II. figs. 20 to 26) are compared with those of 

 Bryce and Webeu, although I am compelled to differ from Mr Bryce as to the most 

 important structures of the animal, the horns and the discs. According to Bryce, 

 the discs have apparently no gap, and are produced into the horns, and the bases of 

 the horns are ciliated, the cilia forming part of the principal wreath. 



I find that the discs are normal and separate, but close together, and the horns 

 spring from folds of skin somewhat to the dorsal side of the discs (technically part of 

 the collar, I believe). The horns are nowhere ciliate. 



These differences between Mr Bryce's observations and mine seem greater on paper 

 than they are in reality. Compare the figures, and see what a slight difference in 

 interpretation is involved. 



A full description of the animal, as observed in Scotland, is added. 



General form. — Slender, more like Weber's figure than Bryce's, broadest in central 

 trunk, well-marked neck, slightly expanded head, much contracted in posterior trunk 

 (4th central), foot generally hidden. Trunk closely longitudinally plicate. In its 

 movements the animal contorts its body a good deal, changing form greatly, expanding 

 one segment and drawing in another. 



Discs. — Elliptical, touching at inner margin, slightly inclined forward. 



Horns. — Long, white, with broad bases and narrow, soft, blunt tips, curved forward 

 from base to apex, and elbowed where the narrow part begins, sometimes angled again, 

 or incurved close to the apex. One horn is generally longer than the other, and in the 

 creeping attitude the tip of the longer one usually protrudes, sometimes both. 



There is no doubt that the function of the horns is tactile. The animal is exceed- 

 ingly sensitive and timid. The horns are employed before beginning to feed, and 



