OCR Text |
Show 1002 DR. J. E. GRAY ON HYALONEMA LUSITANICUM. [Dec. 12, proceeding to pronounce that the specimens from Lisbon and from Japan are the same, after simply examining and comparing one part of the specimens, viz. the sponges attached to their bases, more especially since M . Bocage has shown that the spicules of which the rope-like axis is formed, and the palythoid animal on the bark, are differently constructed. It is to be observed that m y genus Hyalothrix was established on characters quite independent of the sponge examined by Dr. Bowerbank ; for at the time it was proposed no specimen of the coral with a sponge attached to it had been obtained ; and the similarity or non-similarity of the sponge of the Portuguese and Japanese specimens can have no influence on the generic or specific characters of the two corals, part of the characters being the difference in the number and disposition of the tentacles (that Dr. Bowerbank will not see), characters sufficient to separate the animal into genera, whether the animal is a parasitic Palythoa, or is the animal that forms tbe ropelike siliceous axis. They are characters observed not by me, but by M. Bocage; so that, in fact, Dr. Bowerbank's attempt, in which he says " he has smashed me," does not bear very heavy on m y head. I have seen Palythoce affixed on shells containing Bernhard Crabs, from several localitities at a distance from each other ; I have never seen these Palythoce on any other habitat. No one can believe that the three were one animal, as is Mr. Bowerbank's theory with regard to Hyalonema. The Palythoa, the shell, and the Bernhard Crab (Pagurus) from each locality are peculiar, and always of the same species-the shell, crab, and Palythoa being the species peculiar to the locality, viz. Great Britain, United States, Sierra Leone, and Australia; so that the fact of animals living in the same communities and circumstances in different countries is no proof they are of the same species. Dr. Bowerbank, when he came to see the specimen of Hyalonema lusitanicum the day after the paper was read, observed that he had not been able to find one kind of spicula in the Portuguese sponge that is found in the Japan one ; so that probably the result of Dr. Bowerbank's paper will be to show that there are two species of sponges belonging to the genus Carteria, one Portuguese and the other Japanese, instead of proving that the Japanese aud Portuguese Hyalonema are of one species. That is, if we can place reliance in Dr. Bowerbank's microscopical examinations; for, as, when he heard that a sponge had been found attached to one of the Portuguese specimens, he had predicted that it would be found to be the same as the Japanese one, he is as desirous to find that it is so, for fear he may loose his character as a prophet, as he is not to see the tentacles and gonidia in the animal of Hyalonema, which, therefore, be does not see! though Brandt, Schultze, and Bocage have seen, described, and figured them, and many other microscopical observers have seen them at the late soiree of the Microscopical Society. Such capricious faculties of seeing and not seeing make one lose one's faith in Dr. Bowerbank's later observations. Mr. Lee has kindly shown me the specimen of Hyalonema sie- |