366 Records of the Indian Museum. [Voh. VIII, 



different captures, and is therefore not merely an individual pecu- 

 liarity ; more than that, it occurs in the second species of the 

 genus also, N. stewarti, and is therefore not even a specific pecu- 

 liarity. The question naturally arises, whether in these circum- 

 stances the two species should not be separated from Notoscolex as 

 a separate genus, to be derived from this latter by a shifting for- 

 wards of the organs to the extent of a segment. I have however 

 adopted the more conservative course ; the two species are evi 

 dently closely related, and have presumably become differentiated 

 from an originally small stock of a few individuals which had sud- 

 denly developed the mutation in question, — a variation which 

 would seem to be without functional importance. 



From the point of view of geographical distribution the pre- 

 dominating occurrence of the genus Perionyx was to be expected, and 

 so also the presence of a number of species of Eutyphoeus. The 

 proper region of Pheretima, however, terminates^ according to 

 Michaelsen (3), in N. Burma, and in fact one of the species of this 

 genus (P. heterochaeta) found in the present collection is a wanderer, 

 and has been found in many parts of the world ; the other species 

 (P. lignicola) however seems to be endemic, representing perhaps 

 with P. dnomala from Calcutta {3, 4) outposts of this advancing 

 and dominant genus. 



The genera Plutellus and M egascolides , with their headquarters 

 in the Australian region, occur also in S. India and (Plutellus) in 

 Ceylon; they are, however, already known, by means of single 

 species, from the E. Himalayas, and the present records serve to 

 confirm the relationships thus indicated of the earthworm fauna of 

 this region with that of S. India and Ceylon on the one hand, and 

 with that of Australia on the other. 



Here too the occurrence of Notoscolex in the present collection 

 calls for comment. This genus is already known, by means of 

 numerous species, from both S. India — Ceylon and x\ustralia, and 

 from these regions only. Hitherto it has been lacking from inter- 

 mediate territories, and the present record of two species thus 

 accentuates the above double relationship of the Eo Himalayan 

 fauna. 



Finally, relationships of a similar nature are shown by the 

 occurrence of Drawida, belonging to the Moniligastridae. The 

 ancestral genus of the family, Desmogasfer , is endemic in Lower 

 Burma, Sumatra and Borneo ; the headquarters of its descendant 

 Drawida are in S. India and Ceylon; the genus has, however, been 

 recorded a few times from other localities in India (Deccan, Centra) 

 Provinces, Nepal), as well as from the Andamans, but these spe- 

 cies are regarded by Michaelsen (3) as peregrine. It is therefore 

 interesting to note that Drawida is one of the commonest worms 

 in the present collection, and that, while one of the species is pro- 

 bably identical with a species of S. India [D. pellucida), the others 

 are new, and in one case at least {D. kempi) not closely related to 

 D. pellucida. The fact is here again exemplified that the relation- 

 ships of the region have a double direction, — to S. India and 



