ANNELID GENUS CAMBARINCOLA — HOFFMAN 369 



Cambarincola gracilis Robinson 



Figures 77-79 



Cambarincola gracilis Robinson, 1954, Journ. Parasitology, vol. 40, p. 466, figs. 

 1-4. — Holt and Hoffman, 1959, Journ. Tennessee Acad. Sei., vol. 34, p. 103. 



Type specimen. — Holot3^pe, USNM 26110, from Pacifastacus 

 klamathensis collected at YVTiitman College, Walla Walla County, 

 Washington, by A. G. Rempel. Paratypes: USNM 26111, from the 

 Klamath River, Siskij^ou County, California, and USNM 26112, 

 Burnaby, British Columbia. 



Remarks. — This species was described and illustrated in some detail, 

 the account being more meaningful than most of the existing descrip- 

 tions. Not only the body form and jaws were drawn and discussed, 

 but the form of the reproductive systems as well, and a reasonable 

 comparison was made with C. inversa and C. macrodonta. It is un- 

 fortunate that equal care in the diagnosis of new species was not 

 expended by several of Miss Robinson's predecessors. 



I have examined the type material in the U.S. National Museum, 

 and cannot improve upon the original description except to note that 

 the bursa is of the typical cordate Cambanncola-iorm, and not a 

 gradual enlargement of the ejaculatory duct as indicated in Robinson's 

 figure 1. Her figure 3, a reconstruction from serial sections, was made 

 from a worm with everted bursa. 



The reduced size of the male sex organs is perhaps of some diagnostic 

 importance, the appearance in situ being reminiscent of that of C. 

 demissa. Miss Robinson failed to record the histological appearance 

 of the spermiducal gland and prostate, and, unfortunately, I neglected 

 to note the same detail when examining the type. 



A re-examination of material of gracilis can readily establish the 

 status and taxonomic position of the species. Assuming that the 

 prostate is not differentiated (it is known to have no terminal bulb), 

 the species will fall into the Mesochorea section and either the Branchi- 

 ophila group or a new one of its own. 



C. gracilis was recorded from ten localities in California, Oregon, 

 Washington, and British Columbia, a relatively extensive range. Yet 

 curiously enough. Goodnight (1959) refers gracilis to a category of so- 

 called scarce, localized species in his most recent synopsis, while rank- 

 ing in the main part of the key some of his own species known from 

 but a single locality. 



The paratype from California cannot be studied with respect to the 

 reproductive system. That from British Columbia, however, is weU- 

 mounted, and appears to be correctly identified with the holotype. 



Drawings made from the holotype and paratype are presented as an 

 aid for future recognition of the species. 



