neuropodia with a broad basal flange and a 

 bilobed dorsal projection. Inner (dorsal) lobe 

 longer and stouter than outer lobe. No ventral 

 cirri. 



Thoracic notosetae as numerous crenulate 

 capillaries; abdominal notosetae similar but with 

 a few short forked setae in addition. Thoracic 

 neurosetae as four or five rows of completely 

 smooth, slightly bent hooks with guards plus 

 small tufts of crenulate capillaries at the median 

 notch of the neuropodium and at the upper 

 margin. Abdominal neurosetae include three or 

 four acicula with projecting ends, two or three 

 normally tapered crenulate capillaries and five 

 or six flail-setae with stout, lightly serrated shafts 

 and tapered tips sometimes bent at an angle. 

 Remarks. — In discussing the diagnostic 

 characters of his new genus, Eisig (1914: 427) 

 does not mention the flail-setae but stresses the 

 notch in the thoracic neuropodia, the absence 

 of stomach-papillae, the presence of only one 

 foot-papilla on the last few thoracic segments 

 and the lamellar expansion at the base of the 

 abdominal neuropodia. 



Fauvel (1927: 7) in his introduction to the 

 family Ariciidae, states that flail-setae are pe- 

 culiar to the genus Scolaricia and uses the 

 notch in the thoracic neuropodia in his generic 

 key. Hartman (1957: 295) uses the flail-setae to 

 distinguish Scolaricia from ScalopIoH. Pettibone 

 (1957) does not mention Scolaricia since it was 

 not represented in the collections of the U.S. 

 National Museum. Day (1957: 547) distinguishes 

 Scolaricia from Scoloplos by the possession of 

 flail-setae, the notched thoracic neuropodia, 

 and the lamellar base of the abdominal neuro- 

 podia. Unfortunately later studies have shown 

 that none of these characters are peculiar to 

 Scolaricia. The examination of Scolaricia tijpica 

 showed that the notches in the thoracic neuro- 

 podia are neither obvious nor deep but are 

 mere depressions on either side of the origin 

 of the single foot-papilla. They may be seen 

 in species of Scoloplos, as illustrated for Scolo- 

 /j/o.s- arniigcr, the type species of Scoloplos, by 

 Hartman (1957, pi. 29: Fig. 2.) Again the flail- 

 setae are differentiated from normal crenulate 

 capillaries to varying degrees and are present 

 in Scoloplo.^ riscri Pettibone, Scoloplos acmc- 

 ccps Chamberlin, and even to some degree in 

 Scoloplos arniiijcr. The lamellar base to the 

 abdominal neuropodia is also developed to 



varying degrees; to a slight extent in Scoloplos 

 arniiger and to a greater extent in Haploscolo- 

 ptos pitgetten.'iis (Pettibone) and Scoloplos 

 acmeceps as illustrated by Hartman (1957: pi. 

 26: Fig. 3, pi. 30: Fig. 2.) In Orhinia dubia Day, 

 the lamellar lobe is very large and even notched 

 in the posterior abdomen. As this species has a 

 row of 20 + 20 stomach-papillae on the pos- 

 terior thorax it obviously does not fit in the genus 

 Scolaricia. In the face of all this evidence it will 

 be obvious that Scohni'cia must become a .syn- 

 onym of Scoloplos. 



The genus Haploscoloplos was erected by 

 Monro (1933a) with Scoloplos cyliiidrifer Ehlers 

 as the type species. It is generally similar to 

 Scoloplos but is distinguished by the absence 

 of hooks in the thoracic neuropodia, the thora- 

 cic neurosetae being all crenulate capillaries. 

 It may be noted, however, that the development 

 of neuropodial hooks is very variable in Scolo- 

 plos, some species having very few hooks, and 

 it is suspected that very juvenile specimens of 

 Scoloplos lack hooks in most or all thoracic 

 segments. Haploscoloplos is accepted as a valid 

 genus by Hartman (1957) but is regarded as a 

 synonym of Scoloplos sciisii strictu by Pettibone 

 (1957). She writes: "Until it can be established 

 how much the abrasive action of certain sub- 

 strata has to do with the formation of certain 

 types of crotchets [here termed hooks] from 

 capillaries, the character does not seem to be 

 a good one." To me there seems no possibility 

 that the normal hooks with rounded ends and 

 guards could have been formed from broken 

 or abraded crenulate capillaries. While I recog- 

 nize that juvenile specimens of some species 

 of Scoloplos may be wrongly assigned to Haplo- 

 scoloplos, I agree with Hartman and Monro in 

 recognizing it as a valid genus. 



The genus Califia was erected by Hartman 

 (1957), with C. calida Hartman as the type spe- 

 cies. It differs from Scoloplos in having brush- 

 tipped hooks, as well as crenulate capillaries 

 in the anterior thoracic neuropodia. Pettil)one 

 (1957) described Scoloplos (Scoloplos ) sell mitt i 

 with similar characters but with normal hooks 

 as well as brush-tipped ones. It is obvious that 

 Ijoth should be included in Calijia and the only 

 question that remains is whether Calijia should 

 retain its generic I'ank or is better regarded as 

 a subgenus of Scoli>plos. Pettibone (19()3a) re- 

 gards it as a subgenus of Scoloplos. 1 agree 



86 



