CALKINS: SOME HYDROIDS FROM PUGET SOUND. 
337 
many entirely dissimilar forms, such for example as Ilydra squamata , 
were soon included with it. Sars (’28) attempted a revision by giv¬ 
ing to Ilydra squamata the name Coryne, while to Gartner’s origi¬ 
nal Coryne he gave the name Stipula. Ehrenberg later agreed to 
the revision of the old Corynes as expressed by Sars, but objected 
to Sars’s name Stipula on the ground that it was already in use, and 
Ehrenberg substituted the name Syncoryne for Stipula, including 
Gartner’s original Coryne under it. Thus Coryne, Syncoryne, and 
Stipula became synonyms. Allman followed Ehrenberg in the use 
of the names Coryne and Syncoryne, but separated them into two 
families based upon the differences in the gonosome, and this 
causes the present difficulty: is the present species a Coryne or a 
Syncoryne? that is, is the medusa attached permanently or does it 
become free? and what, after all, is the real value of Allman’s dif¬ 
ferential? From the observations of Agassiz and Clarke it appears 
that this differential has no value, for in this very species these 
observers noted that the gonosomes are of two kinds, free and fixed, 
the former produced during the earlier months of the year. Allman 
admitted that these observations, if verified, would be fatal to his 
proposed division, but he doubted the accuracy of the observations, 
and his two families have been widely accepted. Finally, Schneider 
(’97) regards the entire matter as leading to confusion through the 
multiplication of t} r pes, and returns to the earlier nomenclature, 
giving the original generic name Coryne to all of these ques¬ 
tionable forms, a view which Levinsen (’93) substantially held. 
Schneider’s remarks in connection with this change are so excellent 
and so pertinent to all matters of taxonomy, particularly in view of 
the past and present inclination to found new species and genera on 
the strength of slight structural differences, that I give briefly his 
main ideas. 
The relationship of one form to another is so close and the connecting links 
so numerous that we must make the genera embrace many more species if we 
would have a consistent and natural group of the Corynidae. It is untenable 
to isolate the medusa-bearing forms, the trophosome of the two groups, as is. 
well known, showing complete agreement. It can make very little difference 
to the colony whether the sexual individuals are movable or are attached to 
the colony, if the nutritive polyps are not affected by the difference. It cannot 
be said that the medusa-forming colonies are superior to the others, either in 
robustness or complexity. In the struggle for existence a Syncoryne appears to 
be no more hampered than Coryne, and the Syncoryne condition has been 
brought about only by degeneration from the more primitive medusa-bearing 
