Smithsonian miscellaneous collections . Fig. 5.—A, Spicules of Echinoclafhria beringensis, X 210. Camera lucida , Sketch of the sponge, X i- Freehand drawing. spicules are loose in the flesh between the tracts, or in many casesappear to be echinating the tracts but not so as to render them species was first described by Lambe (1893, p. 76) from Island and identified as being Phakellia papyracea Ridleyand Dendy. This latter species was transferred to Phakettia byde Laubenfels (1936, p. 131). Lambe in 1895 (p. 124) reallocatedhis species, this time identifying it
Smithsonian miscellaneous collections . Fig. 5.—A, Spicules of Echinoclafhria beringensis, X 210. Camera lucida , Sketch of the sponge, X i- Freehand drawing. spicules are loose in the flesh between the tracts, or in many casesappear to be echinating the tracts but not so as to render them species was first described by Lambe (1893, p. 76) from Island and identified as being Phakellia papyracea Ridleyand Dendy. This latter species was transferred to Phakettia byde Laubenfels (1936, p. 131). Lambe in 1895 (p. 124) reallocatedhis species, this time identifying it as Phakellia ventilahrum (John-ston). This latter sponge does indeed have the stalked, vaselike shape,but it has a skeleton that comprises axial cores of diacts, echinated bylarge styles. Hentschel (1929, p. 975) recognized that Lambes materi-al represented a new species but still used the same genus. He calledthis Phakellia beringensis. I had a bit of this species, just part of the NO. 6 SPONGES OF THE ALASKAN ARCTIC—De LAUBENFEL
Size: 1305px × 1915px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthorsm, bookcentury1800, bookdecade1860, booksubjectscience
