ART. 17 A NEW SPECIES OF TUEMATODE PEICE S 



APOPHALLUS AND RELATED GENERA 



The species that have been assigned to the genus ApophaJlus by 

 previous writers are as follows: ApophaUws milhlingi (Jiigerskiold, 

 1899), Liihe, 1909 (tjqje of genus), A. hrevls Ransom, 1920, and A. 

 major Szidat, 1924. According to Witenberg (1929), A. major is 

 a synonym of A. muhUngi and A. hrevls a synonym of Rossicotreina 

 donicum Skrjabin and Lindtrop, 1919. The writer has reexamined 

 the type specimens of A. hrevis and feels that it should be regarded 

 as a distinct species, at least until more material is available for 

 study. According to the writer's conception of the genus it stands 

 closer to A, muKlingi than to R. donicum. 



In a recent paper, Witenberg (1930) states that " after restudying 

 the available material of the genera Rossicotrevia.^ Skrjabin, and 

 Tocotremob (Looss), I concluded that they shall not be regarded a& 

 distinct ones, as they are presented in my paper. The differences 

 between their representatives are rather of specific value, not greater 

 than say between Parascocotyle Tonga (Ransom) and any other 

 species of the genus Parascocotyle., i. e., in the number of gonotyls. I 

 therefore find it suitable to regard the genus Rossicotreina as syn- 

 onym of ToGotremay In view of this statement the writer has ex- 

 amined the available material of the species of Rossicotrema and 

 related genera, but can not concur in Witenberg's conclusion. A 

 brief review of the case shows the following situation : 



Ransom (1920) recognized the genus GryptocotyJe Liihe as valid 

 and Tocotrema Looss as a synonj'm and stated: " Looss (1899b) took 

 lingua as type of the genus Tocotrema^ but its characters are so 

 similar to those of the type of Cryptocotyle {C. concava) that the 

 two can not be separated generically." On the contrary, Witenberg 

 (1929) states: "In the species designated as types for Cryptocotyle 

 and T ocotrema essential differences exist in the arrangement of the 

 testes and in the shape of the body, both these characters being 

 correlated. Thus, these two species can not be retained in one 

 genus but must be separated; i. e., both Cryptocotyle and T ocotrema 

 should be considered valid." The generic name Ciureana Skrjabin, 

 1923. is made a synonym of Cryptocotyle. Africa (1929) found con- 

 siderable variation in the position of the testes in a small number of 

 specimens of C . lingua and noted that out of ten specimens two 

 showed the testes opposed as in C . concava and the others varied from 

 this type to that described for C . lingua., and he states : " It seems 

 that there is a wide range of variation both as to shape and position 

 in the same species of the hitherto believed to be fixed structures." 

 The writer has examined a number of specimens of species of 

 Cryptocotyle and of the related genus Rossicotreina and is convinced 

 that the " arrangement of the testes " and the " shape of the body " 



