471] PSEUDOPHYLLIDEA FROM FISHES— COOPER 183 



tion given by Matz for A. rugosum. The scolices are more or less alike, 

 no pseudoscolex (see below, however) being present; the longitudinal muscles 

 are not in bundles; the genital cloacae are irregularly alternating from side to 

 side; the vagina opens ahead of the cirrus instead of behind; the testes are 

 continuous from proglottis to proglottis; the vitelline follicles are located among 

 the longitudinal muscles and are discontinuous; and the uterus-sacs are rounded 

 laterally. In most of these and in many more points, on the other hand, the 

 form agrees with A. crassum, so that the writer is obUged to consider it to 

 belong to that species. Furthermore, a direct comparison of Matz's description 

 with that of Lonnberg brings out many differences. Lonnberg described a 

 pseudoscolex, calcareous bodies, the longitudinal muscles in bundles, the 

 other sets of parenchymatous muscles as above described, the vagina opening 

 behind the cirrus and ventrally, testes discontinuous, vitelline follicles within 

 the parench>Tnatous muscle-sac and also discontinuous, none of which char- 

 acters are to be found in Matz's description, but all of which apply to the 

 material at hand from marine Gadidae. It is to be noted here that Lonnberg 

 accepted the specific name rugosum of Rudolphi instead of the gadi of van Bene- 

 den, which as w^ll be seen presently may not be admissable. Going back, 

 then, to the only other and the earhest description of the anatomy of the spe- 

 cies, namely, that of Linstow (1889:242-5), similar difficulties and confusion 

 are met wath. Linstow gave as hosts for the species, which he called B. rugosus 

 Rud., Gadus aeglifinus, G. morrua, Merlangus carbonarius, M. pollachius, Mer- 

 lucius vulgaris, Lota vulgaris, L. molva and Motella mustela. Characters in 

 his descriDtion not apphcable to the material studied are: No pseudoscolex, 

 but scolex of a rather pecuHar shape and structure terminally; nerve strand 

 56)U in diameter; 10 excretory vessels anteriorly arranged in two groups of 

 five each; genital cloacae unilateral, between the middle and hinder thirds 

 of the edge of the proglottis; vagina opening ahead of the cirrus; length of 

 cirrus-sac 0.42mm. ( !) ; ovary 0.14 by 0.12mm. ; uterus spherical when obviously 

 young; and eggs 59 to 43,u. Testes with a diameter of 60/^, vagina 16 to 26ju in 

 diameter at the beginning, and two \ntelline ducts, besides a few other minor 

 points in the general anatomy, agree, however, v;ith the species as studied by 

 the writer. Thus it is seen there is by no means anything Uke complete agree- 

 ment as regards details among the three descriptions by Linstow, Lonnberg 

 and Matz. But this does not seem to have inconvenienced many of the writers 

 since then, notably Ariola (1900:432) and even Liihe (1900a) whose references 

 to the position of the vitelHne folUcles and the ventral bow in the vagina are 

 at variance with conditions described here; altho Johnstone (1907), Scott (1909) 

 and Nicoll (1910) were ob\nously dealing with the form described by Lonnberg, 

 Schneider (1903a :7-10) seem.s to have been the only one who pointed out the 

 differences betAveen the form from Lota and that from marine Gadidae. He 

 said: '' Bothriotaenia rugosa gleicht sowohl in ihrem Aussehen, als auch in 

 ihrer Anheftungsweise ausserordentlich der Species B. proboscidea, die in 

 unseren Lachsen {Sahno salar) so massenhaft vorkommt. Trotzdem pflegt 

 man aber seit Rudolphi, soviel mir bekannt, imm.er die in Lota meist vorkom- 



