196 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. XV, April 1961 
as 
o 
Fig. 1. A, Lissodendoryx firma (Lambe) : 1, chelas, X 880; 2, style, X 212; 3, der- 
mal tornote, X 212. B, Lissodendoryx noxiosa de Laubenfels; chelas, X 880. C, 
lophon chelifer var. calif orniana de Laubenfels: 1, anisochela, X 212; 2, bipocilli, 
X 212; 3, acanthostyle, X 212. D, Mycale adhaerens (Lambe); anisochela, X 880. E, 
Ophlitaspongia pennata (Lambe); toxa, X 212. F, Stylissa stipitata new species; style, 
X 212. G, Choanites suberea var. lata (Lambe): l, microstrongyle, X 880; 2, tylostyle, 
X 212. (All from camera lucida drawings.) 
vine Pass specimen now being discussed. Its 
isochelas and sigmas were both, however, about 
double the length of those of his lacunosa and 
those of the Puget Sound sponge. It is very fre- 
quently the case in the Myxillinae that there are 
two categories of chelas, a larger and a smaller, 
and two categories of sigmas, a larger and a 
smaller. One or the other of these may be com- 
mon while the other is rare. It may be that there 
exists in the vicinity of Puget Sound but a sin- 
gle species, properly to be termed lacunosa , hav- 
ing a full complement that includes larger and 
smaller chelas, and larger and smaller sigmas. 
It may be that in a specimen which Lambe 
described as lacunosa he found only the smaller 
microscleres, and in the one he identified as 
rosacea he found only the larger. It is here pro- 
posed that the specimen identified by Lambe as 
being rosacea should be dropped in synonymy to 
his lacunosa. Neither of these two specimens 
described by the latter author possesses the pe- 
culiar arrangement of the surface found in the 
