224 ' ENDEAVOUR '" SCIENTIFIC RESULTS. 



teeth, the right seven, the unpaired (III) has ten, the left anterior 

 (IV) nine, and the right eight then none of his variations of 

 the dental plate have so few teeth as 4-5, which appears to 

 be constant in the present species, and though the anterior 

 plate (IV) varies, none of them agree with ours, which show 

 no variation amongst themselves. 



Some of these differences may be due to age or to the 

 mode of preservation, but others, such as the chaeta and the 

 jaws, seem diagnostic, and the accumulation of the .small 

 differences as well as the geographical distribution justifies 

 one in making a new species. At the same time it is clearly 

 allied closely to Savigny's species from the Red Sea and the 

 Indian Ocean. 



E. antennata is a Red Sea and Indian Ocean species, and 

 though Ehlers 1 records a worm under this name from the 

 Chilian coast, he states that it has black acicular 

 chsetse instead of the golden that characterises E. antennata, 

 as Savigny noted in his account ; and it presents one or two 

 other differences, as in the jaws. The same author 2 has also 

 recorded this species from the New Zealand coasts (1907, 

 p. 12), but my material from which I sent him the specimen 

 belongs to E. pycnobranchiata. 



Grassland's ground for including Australia in the distri- 

 bution of E. antennata rests on his examination of the 

 specimen labelled by Grube himself as " E. ^aitcibranchiata," 

 which was obtained from this region. He gives no reference 

 to the paper in which Grube describes a species under this 

 name. Grube 3 himself named a species ' paucibranchis ' : 

 but in a later article 4 identifies this with E. australis, Quatre- 

 fages 6 (which belongs to a different group of the genus in 

 which the gills are limited to a few segments in the anterior 

 region of the body). 



Now one of the characters of Savigny's species is said by 

 Crossland to be the increase in size of the gill and in the 

 number of its filaments behind the middle of the body imme- 

 diately previous to the ultimate gradual decrease 6 . As I 

 have stated, I find no evidence in my material for this 



1. Ehlers Die Polvchaeten d. Magel!. u. chilen. Strandes, 1901, p. 126. 



2. Ehlers Neuseelaml. Annel., 1907, p. 12. 



3. Grube Sohless. gesellsch., 1866, p. 64. 



4. Grube Mittheil. ub. d. Tarn. d. Euniceen Schless. gesellsch., 1877, 

 p. 20. 



5. Quatrefages- Hist. Nat. d. Annel., p. 321. 



6. Savigny does not show this phenomenon in his figure, nor mention 

 it in the text, though he says that the gills may l>e absent in 20-30 last 

 segments. 



