SCALIBREGMA. 391 



Quatrefages, proposed as a substitute in 1865, l)ut not used by subsequent 

 workers. 



Ashworth in discussing {Op. cit., p. 292) the Eumenia glabra Elilers, 

 here estabUshed as the type of a new genus Kebuita, concludes that it stands 

 apart in ha\'ing the skin smooth and in that it "bears no signs of secondary 

 annulation." However, upon reexamination of Ehlers's type I find that the skin 

 in the anterior region and dorsally is strongly tesselated in the manner prevalent 

 in the family and that the somites are distinctly annulated, as usual. Ashworth 

 judges, as he says, from Ehlers's figure, which is inaccurate in respect to these 

 features. 



The Oncoscolex {Eumenia) heterochaetus of Augener (Bull. M. C. Z., 1906, 

 43, p. 159, pi. 6, fig. 110-112), di-edged by the Blake near St. Vincent, W. I., 

 is not properly referred to Oncoscolex, a dubious genus apparently pertaining 

 rather to the Capitellidae. Augener thinks his species possibly identical with 

 Ehlers's glabra because of a general superficial resemblance; but the two forms 

 are widely different, the conspicuous stout acicular blades of the first thi'ee 

 somites and the conspicuously enlarged anterior parapodia of heterochaeta 

 obviously separating it from the other species. In having the. stouter setae 

 on the first three setigerous somites heterochaeta is like the species named by St. 

 Joseph (Ann. sci. nat., 1894, ser. 5, 17, p. 113, pi. 5, fig. 146, 147) Lipobranchius 

 intermedius and by Ashworth made the type of Asclerocheilus. I have not seen 

 a specimen of intermedius; but relying upon St. Joseph's description and his 

 statement that aside from the absence of eyes and ventral cirri, and certain 

 differences in the segmental organs, ova, etc., "sous tons les autres rapports, 1. 

 L. intermedius est absolument semblable au S. minutus [Schlerocheilus]," I believe 

 that species is not congeneric with heterochaeta, the type of which I have reex- 

 mined and for the latter proposed the new genus Gwasitoa. 



Nevaya Mcintosh (Ann. mag. nat. hist., 1911, ser. 8, 7, p. 149, pi. 5, f.l- 

 Ih) is a somewhat enigmatic form placed in relationship to Schleh-ocheilus by its 

 author. But it has no frontal processes, and in the key would be included in 

 Lipobranchus, as it "apparently has no branchiae. It possesses a strongly 

 marked dorsal caruncle and has no bifid setae; a fully developed parapodium, 

 with normal setae, in front of the somite (second) bearing the stout acicular setae. 



ScALiBREGMA H. Rathke. 



Nova acta Acad. Leop.-Car., 1843, 20, p. 184; Ashworth, Quart, journ. micros, sci., 1902, 46, p. 242, 



296; McIntosh, British annelids, 1915, 3, pt. 1, p. 33. 

 Oligobranchus Sars, Fauna litt. Norveg., 1846, 1, p. 91. 



