OCR Text |
Show 1879.J PROF. J. R. GREENE ON A RARE MEDUSA. 799 One cannot but regard the family of Brandtidse as doubtful. Was not Brandt right in constituting his Dodecabostrycha1 a subgenus of Chrysaora 1 It differs from the latter, and resembles the Charybdeidee, chiefly in so far as it is quadripartite. The genus Quoyia2 is very obscure. As to the two other families of Agassiz, it seems inconvenient to revive Lesson's nomenclature. Fritz Muller is certainly right in retaining the generic name Charybdea for the first-discovered species of the group. In this he has the support of his predecessors (including Peron himself) as well as of most later writers, such as Gegenbaur, Graffe, Kolliker and Claus. It may be true that Pe'ron regarded his own species3, and not that of Plancus, as the type of his genus. In so doubtful a case the free action of the law of priority in nomenclature is certainly impeded. Agassiz and Haeckel are the only two zoologists who have given their sanction to Lesson's innovations. They have by so doing tended to promote confusion, and unnecessarily opposed themselves to a large working majority of their brethren. As to the genus Chiropsalmus, since Claus has shown T. haplonema to be a true Charybdea, it becomes a synonym of Tamoya proper. Gegenbaur's family is adopted by myself4, by Victor Cams5, and at a later period by Schmarda6. Fritz Muller, in a letter to Alexander Agassiz7, considers it highly probable that Trachynema may be the young of Tamoya. Subsequent researches of Mecznikow8 show this view not to be tenable. Haeckel, in 18669, adopted Lesson's two families, Charybdeidee and Marsupialidee, as revised by Agassiz. He associated them in one order, Elasmorchida, under his subclass of Trachymedusee10. Haeckel is about to issue a great work on the Medusae in the (postponed) first volume of the new ' Jenaische Denkschriften.' Meanwhile he has published his " System of the Medusae" ".. Of this group he recognizes two primary divisions, the second of which includes Gegenbaur's Acraspeda together with the Lucernariee. These last make one order (Scyphomedusce), while the Phanerocarpce of Eschscholtz constitute another (Discomedusce). Between Scypho- and 1 See Brandt, in ' Memoires de TAcad. Imp. des Sc. de St.-Petersbourg,' abgedruckt, p. 384, and Taf. xxix., xxx. (1838). 2 Compare the remarks of Agassiz (Contr. iv. p. 173), and consult the original figure. 3 This singular and but little understood form undoubtedly constitutes a distinct genus, for which Fritz Midler's name is the best. The species might henceforth be cited as Periphylla peronii (or P. charybdeoides). 4 Natural-History Review, July, 1863, p. 350 and context. 5 Handbuch der Zoologie, ii. p. 548 (1863). • Zoologie, i. p. 232 (1871). 7 Illustrated Catalogue of the North-American Acalephae, p. 55 (1865). 8 Whose Russian memoir I have not seen. I refer, therefore, to Leuckart's 'Berichf for 1870-71, p. 163 (1874). 9 Cenerelle Morphologie der Organismen, Bd. ii. p. lix. 10 Equivalent to Haplostomeas with Trachynemidae of Alex. Agassiz. 11 Sitzungsberichte der Jenaischen Gesellschaft fiir Medicin und Naturwissen-schaft, fiir das Jahr 1878. Published in 1879. Haeckel's " System " was communicated on 26th July (pp. lxxviii-lxxx). |