192 
Z. ASTEROIDA. 
In the “ Annals of Natural History” for May 1838, Mr J. E. 
Gray has inserted the following' notice. — “ Miss Attersoll has lately 
discovered, on the coast of Sussex, the Cornularia rugosa of 
Cavolini , growing- on a Tubularia, and has communicated specimens 
of these interesting zoophytes to the British Museum. This genus 
has hitherto been believed to be confined to the Mediterranean. It 
differs from most other horny zoophytes in the tentacles being pin- 
nate like those of Gorgonia.” V. i. p. 238. 
To enable the student to identify this species — certainly among the 
most singular of its order — I have given a copy of Cavolini’s figure, 
(Vignette, No. 27, p. 187) ; and it may be useful to add the genericcha- 
racter : “ Polyparium basi affixum, corneum ; surculis simplicibus, in- 
fundibuliformibus, erectiusculis, polypum unicum singulis continenti- 
bus. — Polypi solitarii, terminales : ore tentaculis octo dentato-pinna- 
tis, uniserialibus.” Lam . Anim. s. Vert. ii. 128, 2de edit. 
On the eve of the preceding remarks being sent to press, I receiv- 
ed from Mr J. E. Gray a specimen of the Cornularia from “ Wey- 
mouth.” I agree entirely with this sagacious naturalist in his 
opinion of the identity of the zoophyte with Cavolini’s. In texture 
it accords with Sertularia. The root-like fibre is filiform and tubu- 
lar, creeping in a flexuous manner, along the stem of Tubularia indi- 
visa, and putting out at irregular intervals, tubular vase-like cells from 
two to three lines in height. The cells are smooth, with a narrow 
base and a wide even aperture. (Fig. 23, a and b, p. 181.) 
The examination of it has thrown new light on the Polypidom 
described at p. 157, under the name of Campanularia dumosa. I have 
there expressed my doubts as to the real position of that species, 
and I had indeed a suspicion of its being an ascidian zoophyte allied 
to the Vesicularia. Now, however, there can be little doubt that it 
is a Cornularia , probably identical with the C. rugosa, for its com- 
paratively smaller size may depend on peculiarity of habitat. To 
shew their similarity, I place a figure of it beside the other. 
(Fig. 24, a, b. p. 181.) 
