OCR Text |
Show 222 MR. P. S. ABRAHAM ON THE [Mar. 6, 97- CHROMODORIS? C^ERULEATA. Hemidoris ceeruleata, Stimpson, Proc. Ac. Nat. Sc. Phil. vu. p. 379 (1855). Hab. China. Gen. ORODORIS, Bergh, 1875. Mantle (nothaeum) somewhat as in Miamira, keeled above with transverse ribs; no frontal or caudal veils, or lateral lobes lamellate beneath. Foot rather narrow. Integument without spicules. Armature of the oral aperture as in Miamira-a spinous buccal collar. Odontophore as in Miamira ; but the rachis is hardened1. (Bergh.) O. MIAMIRANA, Bgh. /. c. Heft viii. p. 67, T. 7- f. 3-3, & T. 10. f. 9-20 (1875). Hab. Tahiti. Gen. CERATODORIS, Gray, 1850. Echinodoris, Bergh, 1874. Form rather depressed ; back everywhere covered with elongated papillae ; back and papillae spiculose. Rhinophores and branchiae retractile. Odontophore with the pleurae multidentate. Penis armed at the apex with series of minute uncini. (Bergh.) Dr. Gray's diagnosis is very scanty, and, with little doubt, incorrect2. As M. Bergh remarks, Dr. Gray himself had not seen the animal for which he constituted the genus Ceratodoris. The name " Echinodoris " is decidedly more appropriate ; but this does not seem a sufficient reason for giving up the earlier appellation. C. EOLIDA, Gray. Doris eolida, Quoy & Gaim. Voy. de l'Astr. Zool. ii. p. 263, pl. 18. f. 11-15. 1 Echinodoris eolida3, Bgh. Journ. des Mus. Godeff. Heft vi. p. 109, T. 3. f. 4-20 (1874). Hab. Waigiou. Gen. HEXABRANCHUS, Ehr. 1831. ?Heptabranchus, Adams, 1849. Rhacodoris, Morch, 1863 (part of). Body soft; integument non-spiculose (?)4; rhinophores sharply bent, and with an anterior knee, retractile within marginated cavities ; 1 Orodoris, according to M . Bergh, is nearly related to his new genus Miamira, which, again, is closely allied to Casella. The large development of the mantle and the absence of marginal processes places the first among the Dorididse, while the contrary characters approximate the two latter to the Poly-cerida*:. Perhaps the three genera may be regarded as intermediate between Dorichdaa and Polycerida*. 2 Viz. "Tentacles elongate, filiform, not retractile." 3 Quoy and Gaimard's appears to m e a distinct species, judging from their description and figure of the rhinophores and papilla;: the arrangement of the branchise is also different. 4 I can find no spicules in the 29 specimens, representing 5 or 6 species, which I haye examined. |