490 Records of the Indian Museum. [Vol. VIII, 



of Onychophora, are situated on the third pad, (ii) the presence 

 of a horny coat, as weh as a cap, on the spermatophore. (iii) the 

 separation of the openings of the male accessory glands, and (iv) the 

 similarity in age between the embryos found in a single female. 

 It may also he noted that in Typhloperipaius the oviducts are 

 united for a long distance in front of the ovary and that in the 

 male there is only a single crural gland in each of the two pre- 

 genital pairs of limbs in place of the two found in Eopcripatus. 

 In the number and position of the leg papillae and in the complete 

 fusion of the ovaries, the Abor genus agrees with EoperipaUis and 

 differs from all other known forms. It can scarcely be doubted 

 that Typhloperipatus is an offshoot from the original Malaysian 

 stock and that it is, on the whole, much more highly specialized 

 than its allies in the Malay x\rchipelago and in Sumatra 



In other respects the affinities of TyphloperipaUis seem to lie 

 with the neotropical forms {Pcripatus) and with those found in 

 Australia and New Zealand {Peripatoides). 



Evans lays stress on the points of resemblance between the 

 Malaysian species and Peripatus, separating these two genera, 

 along with Meso peripatus, in a distinct subfamily. Bouvier goes 

 still further and places them in a separate family, while Sedgwick 

 holds the view that it is premature and inconvenient even to 

 establish separate genera. 



In Typhloperipatus the affinity with the neotropical species is 

 even more pronounced than in the case of Eoperipaius, for it 

 possesses several characters in common with Peripatus which are 

 not shared by the Mala^'sian forms Thus, the unpaired portion 

 of the vas deferens is of much greater length than in Eopcripatus, 

 being fully as long as in any neotropical species ; the spermato- 

 phore is provided with a horny coat and the male accessory glands 

 have separate openings. It also agrees with Eopcripatus in all 

 the characters which that genus shares with the neotropical forms. 



It seems probable, therefore, that the structure of the Abor 

 genus will be adduced as further evidence that the views advanced 

 by Evans and Bouvier are correct, though it is, I think, reason- 

 able to hold that the belief in the close genetic relationship of the 

 four genera Pcripatus. Mcsoperipatus, Eopcripatus and Typhloperi- 

 patus — the only interpretation that can be placed on Bouvier 's 

 classification — is not sufficiently well substantiated by the evidence 

 available. As Sedgwick has shown, the characters of the different 

 geographical groups or genera intermingle in a most intricate way 

 and, in attempting to assess the value of the various combinations 

 which are met with, it is, in the present state of our knowledge, 

 almost impossible to determine which indicate affinit}^ and which 

 are merely examples of convergence. 



Though agreeing in the segregation of the four genera men- 

 tioned above Bouvier and Evans hold diametrically opposed views 

 as to the question, which is the most primitive genus now exist- 

 ing. A small and yolkless egg, which Bouvier holds to be the 

 primitive condition, Evans regards as evidence of specialization, 



