of the Fishery Board for Scotland. 
199 
The collated results are as follows : — 
FoRAMiNiFERA, 24 Geiieia, 49 Species. 
West Loch Tarbert, Kintyre, ... 19 Genera. 31 Species. 
Loch Ryan, 13 „ 21 ,, 
Loch-na-Keal, Mull, . . . . 12 ,, 20 
Loch Killisport, Argyleshire, . . . 15 ,, 18 
Loch Greshornish, Skye, ... 9 9 
Loch Moidart, Inverness-shire, . . 6 ,, 7 ,, 
OsTKACODA, 17 Genera, 52 Species. 
West Loch Tarbert, Kintyre, . . . 14 Genera, 41 Species. 
Loch Ryan, ....... 6 ,, 23 „ 
Loch-na-Keal, Mull, .... 10 „ 15 „ 
Loch Killisport, Argyleshire, . . . 6 ,, 16 ,, 
Loch Greshornish, Skye, . . . 4 ,, 9 ,, 
Loch Moidart, Inverness-shire, . . 3 ,, 8 ,, 
The list is headed by West Loch Tarbert, which furnishes a total of thirty- 
three genera and seventy-two species, or 80 per cent, of the genera and 71 
per cent, of the Foraminifers and Ostracods from the various lochs. Loch- 
na-Keal conies next as regards the total genera, and Loch Ryan is the 
second lichest in species. The percentage of genera for these are 53 and 
46 respectively, while the relative species supplied by them are 34 and 43 
per cent. While the species of Foraminifera in each is almost equal, 
Loch Ryan furnishes half as many Ostracod species as Loch-na-Keal, 
thus surpassing the latter by nine species. Loch Killisport also shows that 
as lochs opening to the Atlantic abounds with these protozoan and crus- 
tacean forms, and may be taken as a representative of the neighbouring 
Loch Swen which runs parallel with it. It may be said that Loch-na- 
Keal and Loch Killisport exhibit the same total for the two lower classes 
of animal life which are given in detail in the tables, but the former loch 
furnished by dredging a large number of 1he larger Crustaceans, Echino- 
deinis, and Molluscs, and the wealth of tubicolous worms which encrusted 
the many dead shells which cover the bottom far surpassed anything I 
met with in the other lochs visited. The total genera were 51 per cent, of 
all those taken and noted in the foregoing lists, and the proportion of 
species was 36 per cent. 
That oysters fatten best when laid on not too soft mud is well known. 
The mud is richer in food material for the oyster than is sandy ground. 
A fair index of what food material is available can be ascertained from 
the presence of certain forms, which, because of the hard skeletal parts, are 
easily available for future examination. The mud taken has been ex- 
amined by my colleague, Mr Scott, to whose ever helpful kindness I am 
indebted for a list of the organisms which were contained in the various 
samples. These lists are given for the Foraminifers and Ostracods 
for various lochs, viz., for the two lochs where oyster cultivation 
is at present attempted, and for a typical loch in Mull, Skye, the 
mainland of Inverness-shire and the mainland of Argyleshire. 
Conclusion. 
Undoubtedly West Loch Tarbert presents, both from a physical and 
biological point of view, as favourable indication for oyster culture as any 
loch I visil(id on the. West Coast. Loch Ryan, which I have grouped 
with AVi'st Loch Tarbert, may be placed almost beside it, although it does 
not show the same richness of fauna, either Foraminiferal or Ostracodal. 
Loch Swen and Loch-n i-lv'iil might be placed togethar as two of our 
