NO - 3631 BRANCHIOBDELLIDA — HOLT 7 



Dr. Robert P. Higgins of Wake Forest College unsuccessfully 

 attempted to locate the types of B. tetradonta in the Naturhistorisches 

 Museum, Vienna, for me. They apparently are lost and, without them, 

 it is impossible to identify this species. I am grateful to Dr. Higgins. 

 In the summer of 1964, my wife and I took two collections (PCH 1815, 

 1816; USNM 35698, 35699) from the Klamath River, one about four 

 miles east of the village of Klamath River and the other at Burbell 

 Resort about 10 miles north of Yreka, and a third (PCH 1817; 

 USNM 35697) from the Shasta River about eight miles north of 

 Yreka, all in Shasta County, Calif. Previous attempts in 1960 to 

 collect branchiobdellids near the mouth of the Klamath in California 

 and from just below and around the shores of Klamath Lake in Oregon 

 were unsuccessful. All of the hundreds of specimens obtained near 

 Yreka and the village of Klamath River belong to Xironogiton 

 oregonensis Ellis, 1919; moreover, Pierantoni's (1906) illustration of 

 the jaws of B. tetradonta (his fig. 8) could be one of the jaws of X. 

 oregonensis. Uncertainty is introduced, however, by his statements 

 about size (X. oregonensis normally exceeds 2 mm in length), shape 

 (the species of Xironogiton are flattened), and the penis with hooks 

 and a chitinous sheath. In addition, his not-too-clear drawing (his 

 fig. 7) shows male reproductive organs more like those of Cambarincola, 

 which does not have a chitinous sheath (I know of no branchiobdellid 

 that does) nor penial hooks (which are present in at least one as yet 

 undescribed species of the recently established genus Oedipodrilus 

 Holt, 1967, and in some European species of Branchiobdella) . It is 

 possible that Pierantoni was dealing with small, extended, and mac- 

 erated specimens of Xironogiton oregonensis; it is also possible that he 

 was working with a collection containing specimens of Cambarincola 

 or Oedipodrilus: species of both genera occur in the Coastal Range of 

 Oregon, but not, as far as I know, in the Klamath River in California. 

 There is grave doubt as to the type-locality. The Klamath River is a 

 large stream of some length in Oregon and California, and it is now 

 well known that not all parts of the same stream contain the same 

 branchiobdellids (Hobbs, Holt, and Walton, 1967). Before I was 

 aware of the existence of the very small village of Klamath River, I 

 first read "fiume Klamath" to mean simply the river. This is still the 

 reasonable interpretation, but it is possible that translation of the 

 original locality data made the name of the fishing camp into that 

 of the river. It is, finally, possible that Pierantoni's material was 

 labelled incorrectly. Unless the original material is found (an unlikely 

 event), restudied, and a lectotype designated, the status of Branchiob- 

 della tetradonta must remain forever uncertain and the name regarded 

 as a nomen inquirendum. I regard it as such. 



