134 A renicolidae 



Obsekvations on the Eecords. — Most of the records under 

 A. ecaudata, being subsequent to 1898, were made in the light of the 

 newer work on this species, and are thoroughly trustworthy. The 

 earlier records to which definite localities are appended seem also to 

 be reliable. Lafont's is the most southerly record for this species, 

 and it is desirable that it should be ascertained definitely that 

 the species occurring at Arcachon is really A. ecaudata and not 

 A. hrancMalis. 



Ives regarded all specimens of Arcnicola with eleven to fifteen 

 pre-branchial segments as A. ecaudata, the distribution of which he 

 gave as "Europe, Mediterranean, Black Sea." It is abundantly 

 evident that this " species " included A. hranchialu. 



Eathke's A. hoeehii and Dalyell's " Lumhricvs marin'us, another 

 species," were undoubtedly examples of A. ecaudata, with which they 

 agree in their form and ecaudate character, and in the position of the 

 first gill. Eathke's two examples were small and slender, the larger 

 one was only 42 mm. long, but Dalyell's specimen was well grown, 

 being about 215 mm. in length. 



An examination of Mr. Hanna's original specimens of ''A. hicci," 

 which are small, proves their identity with A. ecaudata. 



The statements of the authors cited under A. hranchialis sliow 

 that they have included therein A. ecaudata. Prof. Fauvel spoke, at 

 tlie Zoological Congress of 1898, of A. hoecldi as a synomym, and of 

 Clymenides ecaudatus and BrancMomaldane vincc7iti as post-larval 

 stages of Arcnicola hrancMalis, but in the same year (oj?. eit., 1898) 

 realised that he had confused the two species ecaudata and grvhii 

 (= hrancMalis) under the name &>"fMtc/ii'«/is, and that BrancMomaldane 

 was not a stage of either. 



Johnston's idea of the characters of A. hranchiedis was evidently 

 very hazy ; in fact, he did not know the differences between it and 

 A. ccoMdata. Of the specimens he ranged under A. hrancMalis, 

 three are mentioned, by the names A. nodosa, montagui and 

 dorvilliana, as if they were synonyms. But these names ought 

 not to have been included in the synonymy, as they were used by 

 Leach in labelling specimens in his own collection ; no description 

 of these three " species," nor any further reference to them was pul)- 

 lished. These designations are noniina mida and are therefore not 

 included in the synonymy in the present work. The specim.ens 

 labelled A. nodosa and montagui are still preserved, but "A. dorvil- 

 liana " is no longer in existence. " A. nodosa " is a complete and 

 typical dark example, with bluish-green sheen, of A. hranchialis ; 



