276 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol.83 



Family NEPHTHYDIDAE 



Genus NEPHTHYS Cuvier 



NEPHTHYS SINENSIS Fauvel 



Nephlhys shiensis Fauvel, 1932a, p. 536, fig. 1, a-c; 1933, pp. 40-42, fig. 5. — 

 Monro, 1934, pp. 363-365, fig. 2. 



A single specimen (Chen no. 49) broken in the middle but with 

 apparently none of the body lost. I have listed it as N. sinensis 

 following Monro, because the prostomium structure agrees per- 

 fectly with his description, and the differences between his figure of 

 the parapodium and mine might be accounted for by distortions due 

 to preservation methods. His figure of the parapodium, however, 

 is quite different from Fauvel's, the differences being as great as are 

 those separating other species of the genus. It seems probable that 

 a study of a larger number of specimens would demonstrate that this 

 is a new species. 



A prostomial peculiarity in my material not mentioned or figured 

 by Monro is that the anterior tentacles can be traced as tliickenings 

 for a considerable distance back on the surface of the prostomium, 

 and the anterior prostomial area iymg between these tentacles is so 

 translucent that it looks like a web connecting the tentacles. 



Family CIRRATULIDAE 



Genus CIRRATULUS Lamarck 



CIRRATULUS CRANCHIATUS, new species 



The body of the type and only specimen is about 45 mm long, the 

 peristomial diameter being slightly greater than the prostomial, 

 which is about 0.75 mm. The somites following the peristomium 

 show a gradual increase in width, the greatest width being reached 

 posterior to the middle of the body v/here for about 25 somites the 

 width is 3 mm. Behind this there is a gradual decrease to the very 

 narrow p3^gidium. It is not possible to determine to what extent 

 these differences are due to the effects of preserving fluids. 



The prostomium (fig. 20, g) is conical, its width a little less than 

 its length and with no eyes visible. Because of numerous surface 

 wrinklings, which exactly imitate somite boundaries (fig. 20, g), the 

 latter are difficult to determine, but apparently there are three 

 achaetous somites, this achaetous portion being about twice as long 

 as the prostomium. On its anterior border it is a little wider than 

 the prostomium, and this width hardly changes to its posterior 

 border. The first three setigerous somites are each about one- 

 fourth as long as the achaetous portion, the fourth and fifth are each 

 about one-third shorter than these, the sixth and seventh are still 



