British Bnchytr/eids. By Rev. H. Friend. 149 



Friend, in J.R.M.S., p. 17. Kerry, Dublin, and Donegal in 

 Ireland ; Derbyshire, Notts, Jersey, and elsewhere. 



49. F. pulchra Friend. 1912, Friend, in J.E.M.S., pp. 21-2. 

 Kew Gardens, 1911. Naturalist, December 1911, p. 415. 



50. F. ratzeli Eisen. 1872, Enchytrmvs ratzeli Eisen, in Ofv. 

 Ak. Forh. xxx. No. 1, p. 123 ; Michaelsen, Das Tierreich, p. 100. 



1897, Friend, injrish Nat., vi. p. 206. 1907, Southern, in Proc. 

 Roy. Ir. Acad., xxvii. p. 164. 1912, Friend, in J.R.M.S., p. 14. 

 A difficult species, concerning which I have much material for 

 future study. 



51. F. reversa Friend. 1911, Friend, in Trans. Notts Nat. 

 Soc, p. 41. 1913, J.RM.S., p. 265. Since found in several new 

 localities. 



51. F. rotunda Friend. 1912, Friend, in Trans. Notts Nat. 

 Soc, p. 62. Supra, p. 142. Found at Woodboro' Hall, Notts, 

 December 17, 1912. In looking over my notes I find that this 

 species has been taken by me elsewhere, but entered under other 

 names. An accurate account of its distribution as at present 

 known can only be written when the genus has been carefully 

 brought up to date. 



52. F. striata Lev. 1884, Enchytrzms striatus Levinsen, in 

 Yid. Meddel., 1883, p. 236 ; Michaelsen, Das Tierreich, p. 96. 



1898, Friend, in Zoologist, p. 121. 1907, Southern, in Irish Nat., 

 xvi. p. 73. 1909, Proc. Roy. Ir. Acad., xxvii. pp. 159-60. 1912, 

 Friend, in J.RM.S., p. 13. A well defined species, widely distri- 

 buted in England. 



53. F. ulmicola Friend. 1898, Friend, in Irish Nat., p. 195. 

 1912, J.R.M.S., p. 13. Ireland, Malvern, Jersey. Cf. Zoologist, 

 December 1913, p. 460. 



54. F. variata Bret. 1902, Bretscher, in Rev. Sui3se Zool., 

 x. pp. 19-20. 1907, Southern, in Irish Nat., xvi. p. 73. 1912, 

 Friend, in J.RM.S., p. 22. Very nearly related to F. bulbosa, as are 

 also F. bulbifera, F. glandifera, etc. Sometimes, however, they 

 appear to be quite distinct. Here again much remains to be done. 



It will be clear from the foregoing notes that even yet our 

 knowledge of this genus is far from satisfactory. In spite of 

 careful study, accurate diagnoses and diagrams, and constant 

 reference to authorities and types, I find it frequently impossible 

 to satisfy myself. The number of seta?, shape of the spermathecse, 

 presence of glands, and arrangement of diverticula, the point of 

 origin of dorsal vessel and duct of nephridia, to mention no more 

 of the specific characters, are often very variable and uucertain. 

 Only by the examination in detail of large numbers of specimens, 

 and most careful diagnosis and description, can we hope eventually 

 to place the subject on a satisfactory and scientific basis. Towards 

 that end I am devoting almost all my leisure time. 



