12 NEMERTINES OF PLYMOUTH SOUND. 
Genus DREPANOPHORUS, Hubrecht. 
10. D. rusrosrriatus, Hubrecht. 
AMPHIPORUS SPECTABILIS, McIntosh. 
This species has been the centre of much controversy, and there 
is still some confusion regarding it. ‘The controversy concerns the 
identity or non-identity of the Naples Drepanophorus rubrostriatus 
with the Atlantic Amphiporus spectabilis of McIntosh. Hubrecht is 
of opinion that they are not identical, and he accuses McIntosh of 
having referred the anatomical points which he obtained from Medi- 
terranean forms to Atlantic specimens, thus, according to Hubrecht, 
“confounding specimens, species, and even genera.’’ As far as I 
understand Hubrecht’s position, he maintains that there are two 
species belonging to distinct genera, the one being an Amphiporus, 
the other a Drepanophorus, and that these two present great external 
similarity, and have hence been confounded ; that the Drepanophorus 
is restricted to the Mediterranean ; and that the Atlantic form 
described by McIntosh as Amphiporus spectabilis is distinct from it, 
being identical with the Amphiporus splendidus of Keferstemn and 
Barrois, and not with the Cerebratulus spectabilis of De Quatrefages, 
which he regards as synonymous with his own species. 
Joubin, on the other hand, who has had the advantage of working 
at both Atlantic and Mediterranean Nemertines, is of opinion that 
the two are identical, though he does not appear to have had 
anatomical evidence for this. 
Apart from the very remarkable curved stylet in the proboscis, 
‘the genus Drepanophorus is characterised by the presence of trans- 
verse ceca belonging to the proboscis sheath, these ceca being 
arranged metamerically. And this character alone has been used by 
Hubrecht in referring some of his ‘ Challenger” specimens to this 
genus. Now the specimens that I have obtained at Plymouth, which 
are in complete agreement with the description given by McIntosh 
of Amphiporus spectabilis in his monograph (his views as to the 
proboscis—which, however, he afterwards admitted to be erroneous— 
alone excepted), exhibit very clearly in sections these metameric 
ceca, so that no doubt can remain that they belong to the genus 
Drepanophorus. ‘This being so, is not the identity of the Amphi- 
porus spectabilis of McIntosh with Hubrecht’s Drepanophorus rubro- 
striatus established ? 
Five specimens have been found. The first came from weeds 
dredged in Cawsand Bay on November llth. It was 2 cm. in 
length, and exhibited the bright red stripes shown in Joubin’s 
