ANNELID GENUS CAMBARINCOLA — HOFFMAN 275 



did Ellis. It was placed in the new subfamily Cambarincolinae with 

 7 other genera and, in the key to these genera, placed next to Xiro- 

 nogiton, solely on the basis of having an "accessory sperm tube" 

 (actually this structure is not present in Xironogiton at all). Cam- 

 harincola was then divided into two subgenera following the initial 

 dichotomy in the key of Ellis (1919, p. 256), w4th species in which the 

 "upper lip" is entire composing the nominate subgenus, and those 

 with lobed peristomata forming a new subgenus Coronata which was 

 set up for philadelphica and chirocephala. In the subgenus Cam- 

 barincola, the typical species macrodonta was associated with inversa 

 and vifrea of Ellis, and a new species named C. elevata. Recent study 

 has indicated that both inversa and elevata are members of quite 

 dijfferent genera. 



Subsequent to the appearance of his monograph, Dr. Goodnight 

 published three additional short papers in which new species of 

 Camharincola were described: C. jioridana in 1941, C. meyeri in 1942, 

 and C. macrocephala in 1943. In his 1941 paper on the branchio- 

 bdellids of Florida, Goodnight listed four species for the State. 



In 1947, the study of branchiobdellids was taken up by Perry C. 

 Holt, and his Master's thesis, published in 1949, treated the com- 

 parative morphology of two species (Xironogiton instabilius and 

 Camharincola philadelphica) with respect to the male reproductive 

 systems. From the detailed findings of this study, it became evident 

 that the sexual organs, previously only casually mentioned in print, 

 represent a source of the first magnitude for taxonomic characters. 

 Holt's doctoral dissertation dealt primarily with other branchiobdellid 

 genera, but included notes and studies on Camharincola, and two of 

 the new species recognized were subsequently published under the 

 names C. hranchiophila (1954) and C. macbaini (1955). 



With the recent accumulation of extensive collections of specimens 

 from many localities, it has become possible to undertake extensive 

 systematic studies on American branchiobdellids, and as a preliminary 

 step in an overall general program, the holotype and paratypes of 

 Camharincola macrodonta were restudied and the genus and species 

 redefined in a short paper published by Holt and Hoffman (1959). 



Two of the most important papers recently published b}^ Holt 

 treat the taxonomy and morphology of the genera Ceratodrilus 

 (1960a) and Ellisodrilus (1960b). 



Names and Type Specimens 



In general, the overall validity and stability of any systematic 

 revision increases proportionately to the number of type specimens 

 examined. This is nowhere more true than in the case of the family 

 BranchiobdeHidae, inasmuch as very few of the published descriptions 



