116 LEODICHXE OF THE WEST INDIAN REGION. 



Genus AGLAURIDES Ehlers. 



Ehlers, Die Borstenwiirmer, etc., 1864-1868, p. 408. 



Prostomium with 3 short tentacles which may be entirely covered by the anterior 

 border of the peristomium. Two lobes from the latter may cover over a part of the pro- 

 stomium or may be retracted. Two pairs of eyes carried on the prostomium. The 

 dorsal cirri are flattened plates. Carrier of the maxilla has long and slender basal proc- 

 esses and there are series of toothed plates which may or may not be symmetrical on 

 the two sides. Mandible short and broad, the shafts making up a relatively small 

 portion of the whole. Setae in a vertical row between the two lobes of the parapodium, 

 all simple. 



Savigny (1820, pp. 13 and 14) denned Aglaura and Oenone. The main difference 

 that I can discover between the genera is that Aglaura has three short tentacles ("cou- 

 vertes"), while Oenone has "antennes comme nulle." This was interpreted to mean 

 that the latter has no tentacles, and Ehlers (1864-1868, pp. 407 and 408) gives that as 

 one of the characters of Oenone. Since Aglaura was preoccupied, he proposed the name 

 Aglaurides in its place. 



Benham (1915, p. 230, plate XLIII, figures 95-102; plate XLIV, figure 113) described 

 as Oenone a species with three small tentacles covered by the border of the peristomium; 

 he regards the asymmetrical arrangement of the maxillary plates as of more systematic 

 importance than the tentacles. He thought that by "antennes comme nulle" Savigny 

 really meant that they are too small to be readily seen. 



Willey (1905, p. 284, plate iv, figure 106; plate v, figure 107) described as Aglaurides 

 fulgida a species which had the covered tentacles and which he thought was similar to 

 Oenone diphyllidia; but Benham (1. c., p. 234) objects to this identification on the ground 

 that the asymmetrical arrangement of the jaws puts this species in Oenone. Gravier 

 (1900, p. 278, plate xiv, figures 99, 100) describes as Aglaurides a species in which the 

 lobed organs behind the tentacles appear exactly as in my description (see below). 



Fauvel (1917, pp. 252-254) reports a reexamination of several so-called species of 

 Oenone and concludes that Oenone is not a valid genus, since all can be shown to have 

 tentacles; the lobes figured by Savigny as overhanging the prostomium are capable of 

 being retracted into pockets, and therefore do not always appear; there are two pairs of 

 eyes; and in at least one species the maxillary plates are symmetrical. Since the genus 

 Oenone was first used in connection with 0. lucida by Savigny, and later study has shown 

 that this was merely an immature stage of Aglaura fulgida, Fauvel thinks that Ehlers's 

 amended genus Aglaurides should stand and Oenone be dropped from the literature. 



The protrusible lobes mentioned above are not often seen in the specimens I have 

 collected, and I at first thought them absent and the genus therefore not Aglaurides. 

 Closer examination showed these lobes in a contracted condition behind the tentacles, 

 and a living specimen under observation in Tobago in April 1918 protruded the lobes 

 so far that they covered the tentacles. 



Aglaurides diphyllidia Schmarda. 



(Plate 7, figures 13 to 16; text-figures 429 to 434.) 



Oenone diphyllidia Schmarda, 1861, p. 120, plate xxxn, figure 256. 



Andromache diphyllidia Kinberg, 1864, p. 571. 



Oenone diphyllidia Webster, 1884, p. 321. 



Aglaurides diphyllidia Treadwell, 1916, p. 215. 



Aglaurides erythraeensis var. symmetrica (?) Fauvel, 1914, p. 131, plate vn, figures 1-4; plate vin, figures 38-41. 



Aglaurides symmetrica (?) Fauvel, 1917, p. 252. 



Not Oenone diphyllidia Ehlers, 1887, p. 109, plate 34, figures 1-7. 



The body-color is a dark reddish brown (plate 7, figures 13-16), darkest at the 

 peristomium, gradually becoming lighter farther back, though this general color per- 



