Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:41:14.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On some Medusae of the genera Podocoryne and Phialopsis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

F. S. Russell
F. S. Russell
Affiliation:
Naturalist at the Plymouth Laboratory
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is generally assumed that there are two species of the genus Podocoryne, in northern waters, in which free swimming medusae are produced, P. carnea M. Sars and P. areolata Alder. Of these, the hydroid of P. carnea is known for certain, and that of P. areolata is thought to be the hydroid described by Alder under that specific name. Recently, I have found that there are two more species of Podocoryne medusae in British waters, P. hartlaubi Neppi & Stiasny and P. minima (Trinci). There are, therefore, two more hydroids to be found and it will be shown that the identity of the hydroid of the so-called medusa P. areolata must remain in doubt.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , August 1940 , pp. 525 - 531
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bigelow, Henry B., 1909. Reports on the Scientific Results of the Expedition to the Eastern Tropical Pacific…. XVI. The Medusae. Mem. Mus. Comp. Zoöl. Harvard, Vol. XXXVII, pp. 1–243.Google Scholar
Browne, Edward T., 1898. On the pelagic fauna of Plymouth for September, 1897. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. V, pp. 186–92.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1928. Papers from Dr Th. Mortensen's Pacific Expedition 1914–16, XLIII. Hydromedusae I. Anthomedusae. Vidensk. Medd. naturh. Foren. Køjb., Bd. 85, pp. 27–64.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1936. On the Leptomedusae of the genera Eirene Eschscholtz and Helgicirrha Hartlaub. Vidensk. Medd. naturh. Foren. Køjb., Bd. 99, pp. 239–62.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L. & Damas, D., 1925. Les méduses de la Norvège. Introduction et partie spéciale I. Vidensk. Medd. naturh. Foren. Køjb., Bd. 80, pp. 217–323.Google Scholar
Neppi, Valeria & Stiasny, Gustav, 1913. Die Hydromedusen des Golfes von Triest. Arb. Zool. Inst. Univ. Wien u. Zool. Stat. Triest, Bd. XX, pp. 23–90.Google Scholar
Torrey, Harry Beal, 1909. The Leptomedusae of the San Diego region. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 11–31.Google Scholar
Trinci, Giulio, 1903. Di una nuova specie di Cytaeis gemmante del Golfo di Napoli. Mitt. Zool. Stat. Neapel, Bd. 16, Heft 1/2, pp. 1–34.Google Scholar
Trinci, Giulio, 1904. Notizie sulla gemmazione della “Dysmorphosa minuta” A. G. Mayer e sulla biologia delle Margelidae in generale. Monit. Zool. Ital. Firenze, Vol. XV, Anno XV, pp. 304–10.Google Scholar