134 



ILLINOIS BIOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 



[422 



Genital cloaca median or slightly displaced towards either side, deep and 

 narrow, separated from hermophroditic duct by a narrow velum, half way 

 between anterior and posterior borders of the proglottis. Vagina opens im- 

 mediately behind cirrus or very slightly to one side. 



Testes ellipsoidal in shape, 64 to 75// wide, 45 to 60 long, 64 to 80 deep; 

 60 to 70 in number, dorsal in the medulla. Vas deferens closely appUed to 

 inner end of cirrus pouch, 85^ long, 175 wide and 400 thick, somewhat crescen- 

 tic in the dorsoventral-transverse plane, opposite the uterus-sac. Cirrus-sac 

 long and cylindrical, 0.50 by 0.14mm., inner half deflected towards the vas 

 deferens, walls ver>' thick, composed mostly of circular muscles. Cirrus short, 

 usually not extending outside of the proglottis, 30 to 35^1 in diameter. 



Vagina with bulbous sphincter near its opening, 50ju long by 70 in diameter. 

 Ovary irregularly branched but compressed anteroposteriorly, 0.45mm. wide; 

 isthmus only ventral. Oocapt 30^ in diameter. Vitelline follicles extremely 

 numerous, 35^ long, 60 wide and 85 thick. Vitelline reservoir large, 60/i in 

 diameter. Uterine duct voluminous on both sides of the median line, crowding 

 all other organs. Uterus-sacs alternate irregularly from side to side, each 

 0.45mm. in diameter, encroach greatly on neighboring segments, with thick 

 musculo-glandular funnel-shaped ventral portion. Apertures form two lines 

 on the ventral surface 1mm. apart. 



Eggs 58 by 34/z, dark brown, showing thru walls ofuterus-sacs. 



Habitat: Intestine of the host. 



Type specimen: No. 4711, Coll. U. S. National Museum. 

 Co-type: No. 16.461, Collection of the University of Illinois. 

 Type locality : "Penekese?" 



Although this species was first described more or less in detail by Linton 

 (1889 :456) and further notes were added by the same worker in the following 

 year (1890:728), the writer feels that there is still much to be learned about it 

 in spite of the fact that Ariola (1900:410) was able to indicate the genus to 

 which it belongs and to correct some errors concerning the arrangement of the 



