GENERA INCERTAE SEDIS 24'3 



The characters mentioned above are all of any importance 

 that we can find in the original account of the genus and its 

 presumed genotype. The genus is probably unrecognizable. 

 It is placed by Schneider among the synonyms of Enoplus. 



3. Anguillina Hammerschmidt, 1838. 



Under the name of Anguillina monilis Hammerschmidt 

 (1838, Isis (5), 358) describes a worm found in the intestine of a 

 beetle {Aphodius conspiircatus). The description and figures 

 are insufficient to enable the position of the worm to be 

 determined. 



4. Aphelenchoides Fischer, 1894. 



The description of A. kiihnii Fischer, the sole species of this 

 genus, is not accessible to us. 



Hab. Parasitic in stems of Clematis. 



Fischer, 1894, Ber. d. phys. Lab. d. landw. Inst. Halle, 

 Dresden, iii (1), 1. 



5. Buddenbrockia Schroder, 1910. 



This generic name is applied to certain worm-like parasites 

 occurring in the body-cavity of Plumatella. It is included 

 here because, although Schroder originally described Budden- 

 brockia as a Mezozoan form, he subsequently regarded it as a 

 Nematode. This later opinion does not, however, seem to be 

 borne out by the description. The absence of a cuticle and 

 the presence of an external epithelium appear to exclude this 

 genus from the Nematoda, apart from the entirely anomalous 

 nature of its anatomy and the mode of origin of its eggs. 



Genotype : B. plumatellae Schroder, 1910. 



Schroder, 1910, Zeitschr. f. wiss. Zool., xcvi, 527; 1912, 

 Verh. naturh.-med. Ver. Heidelberg, N.F., xi, 230; 1912, 

 Zeitschr. f. wiss. Zool., cii, 79. 



6. Calyptronema Marion, 1870. 



' Body elongate. Buccal cavity carried on a protrusible 

 oesophageal tube and situated in the middle of a sort of 

 'membranous collar, which ordinarily surrounds the head- 

 region, but is capable of being projected forward. Male with 

 two long and slender spicules. Accessory piece absent. 



Hab. Marine. 



Genotype : C. paradoxum Marion, 1870. 



Marion, 1870, Ann. Sci. nat., Paris, Zool., (5) xiii. Art. 14, 12. 



We quote the main characters mentioned by Marion. The 

 genus, however, appears to be quite unrecognizable, and the 



