OCR Text |
Show 636 SIR C. ELIOT ON NUDIBRANCHS [June 19 1 On the Nudibranchs of Southern India and Ceylon, with special reference to the Drawings by Kelaart and the Collections belonging to Alder and Hancock preserved in the Hancock Museum at Newcastle-on-Tyne. By Sir C h a r l e s E l i o t , K.C.M.G., F.Z.S., Vice-Chancellor of the University of Sheffield. [Received May 19,1906.] (Plates XLII.-XLVIT.*) The present paper is mainly an attempt to settle the synonymy of various Nudibranchiata of the Indo-Pacific with the help of material preserved in the Hancock Museum at Newcastle-on- Tyne. The genus Doriopsilla is discussed, and some new information as to the anatomy of several species (particularly Plaiydoris formosa, PL papillata, Doriopsilla miniata, Kalinga ornata, and several Pleurophyllidiidse) is also given. The material preserved at Newcastle, and kindly placed at my disposal by the authorities of the Museum, is of two kinds, collections and drawings. The oriental collections of Alder and Hancock appear to consist of three separate consignments sent from India. They are not kept separately, but can be distinguished. (a) The collection made by Walter Elliot near Yizagapatam in 1853-4, and described by Alder and Hancock in the ‘ Transactions' of the Zoological Society for 1864, pp. 113-147. This collection contains an almost complete series of Alder and Hancock's types, all duly labelled; but, most unfortunately, many of them have been allowed to dry up entirely, and nothing whatever can be said of either their anatomy or their external appearance. In some cases it has been possible to extract the buccal parts from these dried morsels, but when there were only one or two specimens it was found that they had been already dissected by Alder and Hancock. The collection of " Diphyllidiadae, Pleurobrancliida?, Bullidfe, and Aplysiadae," mentioned by Alder and Hancock in the first paragraph of their paper, is also preserved, and the Pleurophyllidiidfe (= Diphylliadse) are noticed below. The hardness of the animals and the distinctness of the buccal characters make it possible to identify them. They were not named by Alder and Hancock. Even the specimens which have not become dry are in poor condition, which is hardly surprising since they are more than fifty years old. But many of them have preserved their external appearance fairly well, and the hard parts, such as the teeth, armature of the genitalia and of the labial cuticle, <fcc., are uninjured. The ribbon of the radula, however, is generally decayed, so that the arrangement of the teeth is disturbed. (b) A few specimens collected by Kelaart are sufficiently well preserved to repay examination, but, as in the previous collection. * For explanation of the Plates, see p. 690. |