bernæmontanus, Tragus, and Dalechampius, are of no sort of authority, while others, especially Matthiolus, Maranta, Cordus, John Bauhin, and Tournefort, among the older, with Sibthorp, Smith, and Sprengel, among modern commentators, deserve to be consulted with attention. The last edition of the Greek text is by Sprengel, in the collection of Greek Physicians by Kühn, Leipzig, 1829, 8vo., which has been improved by a collation of several MSS. Dr. Sibthorp, who visited Greece for the purpose of studying on the spot the Greek plants of Dioscorides, must be accounted of the highest critical authority; for it frequently happens that the traditions of the country, localities, or other sources of information throw far more light upon the statements of this antient author than his own descriptions. It will ever be a subject of regret to scholars, that Dr. Sibthorp should have died before he was able to prepare for the press the result of his inquiries; what is known of them is embodied in the Prodromus Floræ Græcæ, published from his materials by the late Sir James Edward Smith, and in the Flora Græca itself, consisting of 10 vols. fol. with nearly 1000 coloured plates, commenced by the same botanist, and now nearly completed under the direction of Professor Lindley. SIBTHORP.] So far as European plants are in question, we may suppose that the means of illustrating Dioscorides are now nearly exhausted; but it is far otherwise with his Indian and Persian plants. Concerning the latter, it is probable that much may be learned from a study of the modern Materia Medica of India. When the Nestorians, in the fifth century, were driven into exile, they sought refuge among the Arabs, with whom they established their celebrated school of medicine, the ramifications of which extended into Persia and India, and laid the foundation of the present medical practice of the natives of those countries. In this way the Greek names of Dioscorides, altered indeed, and adapted to the genius of the new countries, became introduced into the languages of Persia, Arabia, and Hindostan, and have been handed down traditionally to the present day. Thus Dr. Royle has shown, by an examination of this sort of evidence, that the Kalamos aromatikos of Dioscorides is not a Gentian, as has been imagined; that Nardos Indike is unquestionably the Nardostachys Jatamansi of De Candolle, and that the Lukion Indikon was neither a Rhamnus, nor a Lycium, but as Prosper Alpinus long ago asserted, a Berberis. With regard to the last plant, Dr. Royle states that Berberis is at the present day called in India hooziz hindee, or Indian hooziz; this last word has for its Arabic synonym loofyon or lookyon; therefore the Berberry is still called Indian lycium, with the reputed qualities and uses of which it moreover corresponds. DIOSMA, a genus of Rutaceous shrubs inhabiting the Cape of Good Hope. They have alternate simple leaves, strongly marked with dots of transparent oil, and diffusing a powerful odour when bruised. Some of the species are to European taste offensive, as the Buckus, with which the Hottentots perfume themselves, and which are chiefly vielded by D. crenata and serratifolia. The flowers of most are white; those of a few are red. Diosma crenata itself, which is reputed a powerful antispasmodic, is thus described: An erect shrub, smooth in every part, and growing a foot or so high; branches tapering, purplish, long, lax; branch lets somewhat whorled, ternate, or scattered, angular, purple, twiggy, incurved, loose. Leaves alternate, on short stalks, ovate-oblong, blunt, flat, smooth, deep green above, paler beneath, dotted with sunken glands, the midrib somewhat keeled, the margin scolloped, glandular-dotted, and shining. Flowers solitary, white, middle sized. Peduncles filiform, shorter than the leaves. By most modern botanists the old genus Diosma is broken up into eight, namely, Adenandra, Coleonema, Diosma proper, Euchatis, Acmadenia, Baryosma, to which the Buckus belong, Agathosma, and Macrostylis. Diosma crenata (Linn.) and Diosma serratifolia (Vent.) yield leaves which at the Cape of Good Hope are termed buchu, or bucco, and which are sometimes used alone, but more frequently mixed. When bruised they emit a strong peculiar odour, resembling rosemary or rue. The taste is aromatic, but not bitter or disagreeable Cadet de Gassecourt analysed the leaves, and found no alkaloid, but 6.65 of volatile oil; 21.17 extractive; 2.15 resin; 63 lignin; 1.10 chlorophylle. Brandes considers the extraclive to be peculiar, and terms it Diosmin, analogous to ca | thartin. The volatile oil and the extractive appear to be the active ingredients. They are usually administered in the form of infusion. Buchu leaves have been long known to the Hottentots as a remedy against rheumatism, cramps, and above all in affections of the urinary organs. They have of late years been introduced into European practice. In their action they resemble those of the arctostaphylos uva ursi, but from their containing volatile oil, buchu leaves are in many cases preferable. [BEAR'S WHORTLEBERRY.] DIP, in magnetism, the angle which the magnetic needle, freely poised on its centre of gravity and symmetrically formed in both its arms, makes with the plane of the horiIt is more scientifically termed the inclination of the needle, or the magnetic inclination. [INCLINATION and MAGNETISM.] zon. DIPHILUS. [ATHENS, vol. ii., p. 18.] DIPHTHONG (dipoyyoç) is the sound of two vowels pronounced in rapid succession, as the German au in maus, pronounced precisely like the English word mouse, the vowel sound consisting of the broad a of father, followed quickly by the sound of u or oo. Again, the in the English word mind, though represented by a single character, is virtually a diphthongal sound, consisting of the broad a of father, followed by the vowel sound which is heard in mean. The name diphthong however is commonly given to any vowel sound represented by the junction of two vowels, as in dream, though the sound produced is not compounded. All diphthongs are said to be long syllables; and this would be true if they were only employed to mark the union of two vowel sounds. This probably was originally their sole office; for in many English words now written with diphthongs, but pronounced as if they had single vowels, an earlier pronunciation contained the double sound; and indeed this view is often supported by the provincial pronunciation of a word. For example, such words as meat, dream, are pronounced in many parts of England as dissyllables, meat, dream. In practice however a diphthong is often used where the vowel sound is not only uncompounded but short, as in friend, breadth. Again, diphthongs are occasionally used to represent simple sounds intermediate between the vowels, as in the English word cough, and the German sounds represented by ae, oe, ue, commonly written ä, ö, ü, where the dots placed over the vowels are merely a corruption of the letter e. DIPHUCE PHALA, a genus of coleopterous insects belonging to the Lamellicornes, section Phyllophagi. This genus appears to be confined to Australia, and the species of which it is composed are distinguished from those of allied genera chiefly by their having the clypeus deeply emarginated; they are of an oblong form; the thorax is attenuated anteriorly, the elytra are somewhat depressed, and the abdomen is very convex. The antennæ are cightjointed, and the club is composed of three joints; the anterior tibiæ are generally dentated externally; the anterior tarsi of the males have the four basal joints dilated, and furnished with a velvet-like substance beneath, and all the claws are bifid. A rich golden green appears to be the prevailing colour of these insects, and we understand that they are found on flowers. Diphucephala sericea (Kirby) is nearly half an inch in length, of a golden green hue, and has a silk-like gloss on the upper parts; the legs are red; the anterior tibiæ have an obtuse tooth-like process on the outer side, near the apex; the head and thorax are very thickly and delicately punctured; the elytra are covered with confluent punctures which are arranged in longitudinal rows, and each elytron has two smooth elevated stria; the under parts of the body are covered with white scale-like hairs. This is the largest species known; there are however many which are nearly equal to it in size. The genus Diphucephala forms the subject of a monograph in the first volume of the 'Transactions of the Entomological Society of London,' where sixteen species are described. DI'PHYDES, DI'PHYDÆ, a family of zoophytes, thus characterized by M. de Blainville, and placed by him between the Physograda and the Ciliograda. Body, bilateral and symmetrical, composed of a very small, nucleïform, visceral mass, and two natatory organs, which are contractile, subcartilaginous, and serial; one anterior, in more or less immediate connexion with the nucleus, | by an examination of certain species of Physsophora. M. de which it seems to envelop; the other posterior, and but little adherent. M. Bory de St. Vincent, in his voyage to the African coasts, appears to be the first who noticed these animals, which abound in all the seas of warm latitudes, with any degree of certainty. He considered them to be Biphores (Salpa). Tilesius also said something of them in the zoological part of Krusenstern's voyage. Blainville then states that the body of a Diphyes, at first sight, and especially as it appears during life, seems to be Head, at the extremity of a more or less proboscidiform composed of two polygonal, subcartilaginous, transparent stomach. parts, placed one after the other, the posterior portion pene Vent, unknown; a long cirrhiform and ovigerous pro-trating more or less into an excavation of the anterior por duction, proceeding from the root of the nucleus, and pro- tion. These two parts, constantly more or less dissimilar, longing itself more or less backwards. have this in common: viz., that they are ordinarily more or less profoundly hollowed out by a blind cavity opening externally by a very large and regular, though diversiform aperture. Adding to this a production regarded as the ovary by Cuvier, and which comes out of the superior cavity of the anterior cartilaginous part, we have the whole that had been remarked about the Diphyda before the memoir of Quoy and Gaimard, who have described numerous species which they have observed, very nearly like Cuvier; with this modification, however, that they have considered the two parts as belonging to the same animal: but the study of the differences of form necessary for the establishment of the new genera which they have proposed, and above all, the good figures which they have given, have enabled them to go further, and to see in the Diphyde something beyond the two subcartilaginous parts. In fact, taking for example the Calpes, and especially the Cucubali and the Cuculli, it is seen that the bodies of the Diphyde form true nuclei, situated at the anterior part of the entire mass, and that the nucleus is composed of a proboscidian œsophagus, with a mouth having a cupping-glass-like termination (en ventouse), continuing itself into a stomach surrounded with green hepatic granules, and sometimes into a second, filled with air. There is, moreover, to be remarked, at the lower part, a glandular mass, which is probably the ovary, and is in more or less immediate relation with the cirrhigerous and perhaps oviferous production, which is prolonged backwards. This nucleus would seem to be more or less enveloped by the anterior cartilage, which offers to it, in fact, a cavity sometimes distinct from the second (which has been mentioned above), serving for locomotion, and at other times confounded with it; it is, besides, in intimate connexion with its tissue by filaments, which M. de Blainville believes to be vascular. It has been already remarked that the posterior part of the body is hollowed out by a great cavity, which is continued nearly throughout its length: and it is from the bottom of this cavity that a prolongation, perhaps equally vascular, proceeds, which goes above the root of the oviferous production, and unites itself, without doubt, with the nucleus. Thus,' continues M. de Blainville, it would appear to me certain that this part really belongs to the Diphyes; but it is easy to conceive how it may be detached by the slightest effort, because the union is only effected by a single flament. But it was Cuvier who first formed these creatures into a separate genus, under the name of Diphyes, and he placed them at the end of his Hydrostatic Acalephans, immediately after Stephanomia of Peron. Cuvier describes the genus as very singular, consisting of two individuals, which are always together, one including itself in a hollow of the other (l'un s'emboîtant dans un creux de l'autre), an arrangement which nevertheless permits their separation without the destruction of life. They are, he observes, gelatinous, transparent, and move very nearly like the Medusa. The including individual (l'emboîtant) produces from the bottom of its hollow a chaplet (chapelet), which traverses a demi-canal of the included individual (l'emboîté), and would seem to be composed of ovaries and of tentacula and suckers like those of the preceding genera. Cuvier then goes on to state the divisions established by MM. Quoy and Gaimard, according to the relative forms and proportions of the two individuals. Thus, in the Diphyes, properly so called, the two individuals are nearly alike, pyramidal, and with some points round their opening, which is at the base of the pyramid. In the Calpes, the included individual has still the pyramidal form, but the including individual is very small and square. In the Abyles, the included individual is oblong or oval, and the including rather smaller and bell-shaped. In the Cuboides, it is the included individual which is small and bell-shaped; the including individual is much larger and square. In the Navicules, the included individual is bell-shaped; the including individual large also, but slipper-shaped (en forme de sabot). Cuvier concludes by remarking that there are many other combinations, and refers to the memoir of MM. Quoy and Gaimard, in the Annales des Sciences Naturelles,' tome x. This, then, is the account given by Cuvier in his last edition of the Règne Animal;' but it was in the first that he established the genus, and in that edition he evidently knew of only one species from the Atlantic, for which he refers to M. Bory's Voyage,' and places the genus among his free Acalephans, between Cestum of Lesueur and Porpita of Lamarck. It is to the first edition that M. de Blainville refers in his Actinologie,' and he there says that in fact M. Lesueur, more than a year previously, had sent him the drawing of a genus of the same family, to which Lesueur had given the name of Amphiora (Amphiroa ?), and which M. de Blainville observes was, from what he now knows of the Diphyes, very nearly approximated to them, to say the least; but the want of information as to the characters of the genus prevented him (De Blainville) from publishing it. He remarks, that he ought to add that Lesueur was more fortunate than Cuvier, inasmuch as the former had at his disposal a complete and living animal; while the latter characterized as one Diphyes an animal composed of two individuals, giving as the type the anterior moiety only, to which he attributes two apertures, one for the mouth and the other for the exit of the cirrhigerous production which he regards as the ovary. M. de Blainville then, after some further observations as to the place assigned to the animal by Cuvier, refers to the Memoir of MM. Quoy et Gaimard,' above mentioned, and states that during the rest of their voyage those zoologists had met with more Diphyde, of which they had formed distinct genera, and had submitted them to his examination; that he had also obtained some beautiful drawings of these animals, made by Lesueur in the Gulf of Bahama; and that M. Paul-Emile Botta, placed by his recommendation on board a merchant ship about to make a voyage round the world, had also communicated to him the observations which he (Botta) had been able to make on the genus; so that, difficult as the study of these singular animals may be, he thinks that he has been able to arrive at their true natural relations, aided, above all, After this statement of the organization of Diphyes, one may see that the part which M. Cuvier regarded as by itself constituting the animal, is only an organ of minor importance; that there must be added to it the posterior part, which was regarded as a distinct individual; but above all, that it is necessary to take into the account the visceral nucleus, which, with the oviferous production, forms the essential part of the animal. From this analysis of a Diphyes, it is evident that it cannot be an animal of the type of the Actinozoaria; but in order to establish its natural relationship, let us see what the observers above named have recorded of its manners and habits. The Diphyes are very transparent animals, so that it is often very difficult to distinguish them in the sea, and even in a certain quantity of water taken from it. It is especially at considerably great distances from the shore that they are met with in the seas of warm climates, and often very numerous. They float and swim apparently in all directions, with the anterior or nucleal extremity foremost, and getting rid of the water which they take in, by the contraction of the two subcartilaginous parts; their aperture, consequently, is always directed backwards. When the two natatory organs are equally provided with a special cavity, it is probable that the locomotion is more rapid; it can, finally, be executed by either the one or the other, in proportion to their size. The posterior part is attached to the nucleus with so little solidity, that it often happens that it detaches itself from it accidentally; so that M. Botta believed that an entire Divhyes was only formed by one of these parts, he having but very rarely found these animals complete. During locomotion the cirrhigerous and oviferous production apparently floats extended backwards, lodging itself partly in a gutter, into which the inferior edge of the posterior natatory organ is hollowed out; but it has not the same length, the animal being able to contract it powerfully and even to the extent of withdrawing it inwards entirely; from this it is evident that this organ is muscular. But what is very remarkable is, that throughout its length, and placed at sufficiently regular distances, are found organs which MM. Quoy and Gaimard regarded as suckers, and which possessed, in fact, the faculty of adhesion and bringing the animal to anchor, as M. Botta was satisfied. I dare not decide what this organ is; but I am strongly inclined to believe either that it is a prolongation of the body analogous to that in the Physsophora*, or that it is, if not an ovary, at least an assemblage of young individuals, a little like what takes place in the Biphores. In the actual state of our knowledge with regard to the Diphyes, it seems to me that they are, so to speak, intermediate between the Biphores and the Physsophora. They approach the first, whose cartilaginous envelope is sometimes tripartite, as M. Chamisso has taught us, inasmuch as that the visceral mass is nucleiform, that it is contained in great part in this envelope, that the latter has two apertures, and that it is by contraction that it executes locomotion. We find, on the other hand, a mode of approximating the Diphyes to the Physsophore, in regarding the natatory organs as analogous to those which we have seen in Diphysa, which has the smallest before and the largest behind, both the one and the other being perfectly bilateral. The mouth is also at the extremity of a sort of proboscis. There is sometimes a bullöid swelling full of air: finally, the body is terminated by a cirrhigerous production, which is perhaps oviferous. For the rest we are obliged to agree that these approximations require, before they are freed from doubt, a more complete knowledge than we at present possess, not only of the organization of the Diphyes and Physsophore, but also of the Biphores themselves. According to the views of M. Mertens, chief naturalist in the last circumnavigation of the Russians, the Diphyes would be no other than Stephanomia; in which case the oviferous and cirrhigerous productions of the Diphyes must be considered the analogues of the posterior and tubular part of the Stephanomice. We have already said that MM. Quoy and Gaimard, in their memoir on the Diphyde, had established many new genera, having in view principally the form and the proportion of the two natatory organs or parts of the body. M. Lesueur has also established genera, some of which may be incorporated with those of the zoologists of the Astrolabe; unfortunately our knowledge of these genera is confined to figures only. Lastly, M. Otto has proposed one or two, but they are founded on detached parts or incomplete animals. The greater part of these genera are not, in reality, very distinct; we adopt them nevertheless provisionally at least in order to facilitate the study of beings so singular. The Diphydæ seem to us capable of division into two great sections, according as the anterior part is provided with a single or double cavity. M. Eschscholtz, in his systematic distribution of the species of Diphyde, has regard to the number of cavities of the anterior natatory organ, and to the presence of one or more suckers in the tubular production. From this test have resulted genera otherwise circumscribed, and not less numerous than from our manner of viewing the subject.' The following is M. de Blainville's arrangement. a. Diphyde whose anterior part has but a single cavity. Genera, Cucubalus. Body, provided with a large proboscidiform exsertile sucker, with a bunch (grappe) of ovaries at its base, lodged in a large single excavation of a natatory anterior cordiform rgan, receiving also the posterior, which is also cordiform and hollowed into a cavity with a posterior and sub-oval nhee. Example, Cucubalus cordiformis, the only species cited of the genus established by MM. Quoy and Gaimard. Length, two lines. Differs from the other Diphydæ, first, in having the nucleus much less hidden and sunk in the anterior natatory body, which has moreover only one large ravity in which it is plunged; secondly, in having the ovi This (savs M. de Blainville) is the opinion of M. Eschscholtz, who gives tots part the name of ductus nutritorius (nourishing canal), which, he says, maple, or provided with a single sucker, in the first section, and complex el with many suckers, in the seond. M. de Blainville observes that this genus does not really differ from the preceding, excepting in the form of the natatory organs, and he doubts the propriety of retaining it, especially as it consists but of one species. M. Botta, he observes, who had occasion frequently to observe in nearly all the seas of warm climates, from the coast of Peru to the Indian archipelago, a great number of animals resembling the Cucullus of MM. Quoy and Gaimard, and having found them sometimes free and at other times forming part of the cirrhigerous and oviferous production of the ordinary Diphyes, has been led to think that the Cuculli may be only a degree of development of a Diphyes. Although, concludes M. de Blainville, this is conceivable up to a certain point, inasmuch as in the Cuculli there is no cirrhigerous production, which seems to prove that they are not adults, the difference nevertheless of the natatory organs is so great that he dares not come to this decision. Cymba (Nacelle).* Body furnished with a large exsertile proboscidiform sucker, having at its base a mass of ovariform organs, lodged in the single and rather deep cavity of a naviform natatory organ, receiving and partially hiding the posterior natatory organ, which is sagittiform, pierced behind with a rounded orifice crowned with points, and hollowed on its free border by a longitudinal gutter. Example, Cymba sagittata (Quoy and Gaimard); N.† sagittata (De Blainville). Locality, Straits of Gibraltar. N. sagittata. M. de Blainville remarks that he ought to observe that M. Eschscholtz says that this genus, to which he unites the two following genera, possesses an anterior natatory organ with two cavities, and of these the natatory cavity projects in the form of a tube. M. de Blainville further observes that this genus does not differ from the Cuculli, except ir the form of the natatory organs; in fact, the disposition of the nucleus in the bottom of the single cavity into which • Mr. Broderip had appropriated this name to a subgenus of Volutida. See Sowerby's Genera of recent and fossil Shells, No. 28, and Mr. B.'■ Monograph in Mr. Sowerby's 'Species Conchyliorum.' ↑ Navicula? This again, according to M. de Blainville, is a genus scarcely distinguishable from the preceding genera, and only by the form and proportion of the natatory organs. 'As,' says M. de Blainville, I have had a considerable number of individuals at my disposal, I have been able to satisfy myself as to the characteristic which I have given of them. I have in fact clearly recognized that the great and single cavity of the anterior and cubic organ contained a considerable visceral nucleus, in which I have been able to distinguish a sort of proboscidiform stomach, surrounded at its base with an hepatic organ; and further backward, a granular ovary, contained in its proper membrane, and whence escaped a long ovigerous production. I have also been equally able to satisfy myself that the natatory posterior organ, of the same conformation, as far as the rest, as in the true Diphyes, was entirely hid in the excavation of the anterior organ with the visceral mass. Amphiroa alata. 1, 1a, Amphiroa alata; 1 b, its nucleus extracted. tion. Another species, he adds, Amphiroo truncata, would appear to approximate nearly to the Calpes of MM. Quo and Gaimard, by the great disproportion of the two parts. 3. Diphyde whose anterior part is furnished with two dis tinct cavities. 1 b Enneagona hyalina. Calpe pentagona. 1, Calpe pentagona (profile); 1 a (under side); 1b, nucleus. M. de Blainville observes that this genus is really suffi ciently distinct from the true Diphyes, with which it has nevertheless many relations, not only by the great difference of the two locomotive organs, but because the posterio organ is only applied against the anterior one, and does no penetrate into the visceral cavity. He remarks that he ha 1, 1 a, 1b, Enneagona hyalina under different aspects; 1c, visceral part; examined some individuals well preserved in spirit, and has 1 d, nucleus. Amphiroa.* Body nucleiform, of considerable volume, furnished with a proboscidiform stomach, having at its base a bunch of ovaries, prolonged into a long filament, contained in an anterior, polygonal, short, natatory organ, cut squarely, with a single cavity in which the posterior organ, which is equally short, polygonal, and truncated, is inserted. Example, Amphiroa alata (Lesueur). Locality, Seas of Bahama. M. de Blainville observes that this genus is only known by the beautiful figures sent by M. Lesueur, and of which one reached M. de Blainville more than ten years ago, but without description, the want of which prevented him from publishing it. Nevertheless it is evident, he remarks, on referring to these figures, that the Amphiroa are Diphyda, but with natatory organs of a particular form and propor The term Amphiroa is also employed by Lamourorx aud others to distin guish a genus of Corallines, easily seen that the nucleus is composed of a sort of stomach with a sessile mouth and with a small hepatic plate (plaque of a green colour applied against it, and besides of a sor of aeriferous bladder situated behind. At the lower root o the stomachal swelling is the ovary, formed by a mass of granules, and which seems to prolong itself backwards into a long production charged with oviform bodies, and others longer and more bell-shaped. This production proceeds from the anterior natatory organ, and passes under the posterior one in following the gutter into which it is hol lowed on its lower surface. Finally, this posterior organ equally truncated at the two extremities, is hollowed nearly throughout its length into a great cavity, from the bottom of which a vessel which is continued to the root of the ovary of the nucleus may be clearly seen to proceed. Abyla. Body nucleiform, inconsiderable, with a very long cirrhigerous and oviferous production. Anterior natatory body much shorter than the other, subcuboid, with a distinct 1, Abyla trigona; 1 a, posterior parts 1 b, anterior or visceral part. M. de Blainville observes that this genus does not really differ from the preceding, excepting in the form of the natatory organs, and above all in that the anterior part is pierced with a depression sufficiently considerable for the ledgment of a part of the other, which has a long inferior furrow (sillon) and a posterior terminal opening. To this genus M. de Blainville refers a species of Diphydæ, found by MM. Quoy and Gaimard in Bass's Strait, and of which they had provisionally formed the genus Bassia, which does not seem to M. de Blainville to be sufficiently characterized. M. Eschscholtz, remarks M. de Blainville, rightly unites this genus with the preceding, as well as the genus Rosacea of Quoy and Gaimard, the latter perhaps erroneously. Diphyes. Body nucleiform indistinct, situated in the bottom of a deep cavity, whence proceeds a long tubular production, furnished throughout its extent with proboscidiform suckers, having at their root granular corpuscles and a cirrhiferous filament. Natatory bodies nearly equal and similar; the anterior with two distinct cavities, the posterior with a single one, with a round aperture provided with teeth. Example, Diphyes Bory (Quoy and Gaimard); Diphyes campanulifera (Eschscholtz). 1 | is the most common and the most generally spread in all seas, is used in the work of MM. Quoy and Gaimard for species which have the natatory organs nearly equal in form and size, the first whereof has two deep cavities, of which the one receives a part only of the other which has a long inferior ridge for the lodgment of the cirrhigerous production. M. Lesueur, he adds, who has equally adopted this division of the Diphyda, gives it the name of Dagysa adopted by Solander, and also by Gmelin; but M. de Biainville asks, is it certain that the animal seen by Solander was a Diphyes, and not a Biphore? He adds, that M Lesueur has figured five species belonging to this genus perhaps all new, and from the seas of South America. This genus was established by M. Otto, and M. de Blainville admits that he knows no more of it than is to be collected from M. Otto's description and figure. He seems to doubt, however, whether the genus may not have been founded on the posterior natatory organ of a Diphyes, perhaps of the division properly so called. M. Eschscholtz makes this organized body a species of his genus Eudoxia, which comprehends Cucubalus and Cucullus of Quoy and Gaimard, admitting that the two natatory organs are intimately united so as to form, apps rently, but one. Praia. Body subgelatinous, rather soft, transparent, binary, depressed, obtuse, and truncated obliquely at the two extremities, hollowed into a cavity of little depth, with a round aperture nearly as large as the cavity, and provided with a large canal or furrow above. Example, Praia dubia (Quoy and Gaimard). 1c [Diphyes Bory.; 1. The entire animal (profile); 1 a, anterior part of the same; 1 b, posterior part; le animal magnified; 1 d, posterior part of the same. M. de Blainville observes that the denomination of Diphyes, employed by M. Cuvier for a single species, which P. C., No. 532, [Praia dubia.] M. de Blainville describes, from personal observation, this provisional genus of MM. Quoy and Gaimard as being subgelatinous, rather soft, and transparent. Its form, he remarks, is regularly symmetrical, and it seems to be divided into two equal parts by a great furrow which traverses it from one end to the other. It has a shallow cavity with a rounded aperture, without denticles or appendages at its circumference. In the tissue M. de Blainville perceived a mesial vessel, giving off two lateral branches, with very similar ramifications; and he is inclined to think that the form is only the natatory organ of some large species of Physsophora: the substance is too soft for a true Diphyes. |