“Eurypon miniaceum, Thiele.
E. miniaceum, Thiele, 1905, p. 446, fig. 64; Raspailia irregularis, Hentschel, 1914, p. 121, pl. viii, fig. 6.
Occurrence. St. 91: False Bay, South Africa, 35 m.; St. 156: South Georgia, 200-236 m.; St. 190 : Palmer Archipelago, 93-130 m.
REMARKS. In external form, the two Antarctic specimens in the present collection are practically identical and are similar to Raspailia irregularis; but so far as the spiculation is concerned the first is almost indistinguishable from R. irregularis and the second from Eurypon miniaceum. The chief difference in spiculation between these two specimens is that the “eigenthümliche Acanthostyle” is absent in the one and present in the other, although when present this spicule is not quite typical, since the base is tylote or subtylostylote instead of stylote. Since the main difference between Raspailia irregularis and Eurypon miniaceum consists in the absence and presence respectively of this curious spicule, it seems almost certain in the light of the present observations that the two are identical. It appears probable that, in addition to its being of variable occurrence, the spicule is variable in form.
It is most surprising that a specimen of this species should have been found at False Bay, South Africa. This specimen is sub-spherical, with no visible point of attachment, and the surface is uneven, conulose and minutely hispid. The oscules and pores are probably situated in certain deep but irregular depressions found on the surface of the sponge. The spiculation appears to be typical except that all spicules are slightly smaller than those of the holotype and the “eigenthümliche Acanthostyle” is not to be found.
DISTRIBUTION. Calbuco, Chile.”
(Burton, 1932)
