56 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol.81 



Locality. — Houston, Tex. 



Tyi^e sjjedmen.—V.S.'^M. Helm. Coll. No. 31708. 



Remarks. — The foregoing description is based on two males and 

 three females taken from the rectum of a blue racer. Like the pre- 

 ceding species, it belongs to the group of Kalicephalus worms with 

 divergent uteri. It is easily distinguished from K. coronellae Ort- 

 lepp and K. agkistrodontis by the smaller size, the shorter esophagus 

 and spicules, the shape of the gubernaculum, the shape of the dorsal 

 ray, the position of the vulva, and the blunt female tail. 



Genus OSWALDOCRUZIA Travassos, 1917 



A representative of this genus has been known from North 

 America since the time of Joseph Leidy. It is now known by the 

 name of O. leidyi Travassos, but, as Steiner (1924) has already 

 pointed out, it is impossible as yet satisfactorily to distinguish this 

 form from certain species described earlier. Recently Walton has 

 reported several other species from this continent. 



OSWALDOCRUZIA PIPIENS Walton, 1929 



Plate 5, Figures 3-6 



The features used to differentiate Oswaldocruzia pipiens Walton 

 and 0. leidyi Travassos are not satisfactory in view of the variation 

 present in my material. Walton (1929) lists "size, possession of 

 distinct cervical alae, and decidedly different dorsal ray pattern " 

 as the important differences between these forms. The difference in 

 size between O. pipiens and O. leidyi is only an apparent one, since 

 neither Walton nor Steiner records any variation in their measure- 

 ments, while in my material the variation is nearly as great as the, 

 range between their measurements. The dorsal ray pattern is also 

 variable. Of three males taken from Terrapene Carolina triunguis, 

 two had a pattern similar to that figured by Walton (1929) for O. 

 pipiens, while one was similar to that figured by Steiner (1924) for 

 O. leidyi\ and of two males from a specimen of Leiolopisma lateralCj 

 one had a pattern similar to 0. pipiens., and the other a pattern simi- 

 lar to O. leidyi. My material from other hosts is limited, but among 

 these there is also a great variation of the dorsal ray pattern. The 

 remaining character mentioned by Walton, the cervical alae, is 

 always present in my material. Steiner mentions lateral alae, but 

 he does not mention the cervical alae. Therefore, we may presume 

 that they were absent in his material. It is, however, well to re- 

 member that Steiner published before Morishita (1926) had at- 

 tached such great systematic importance to the cervical alae. For 

 the present, therefore, it seems advisable to retain both pipiens and 

 leidyi as separate species distinguishable by the presence or absence 



