506 RICHAKD EVANS. 



from the histological details of the parts under consideration 

 in Eoperipatus. 



The only desirable modification of the above conclusions is 

 that not the whole, but a portion, of the canal passing from 

 the thin-walled vesicle to the oviduct is homologous with the 

 renal funnel — the part situated nearest the oviduct, of which, 

 though it is curved, it seems to be a continuation, being homo- 

 logous with a portion of the coiled tube of the renal organs. 



To recapitulate, the homology of the parts seems to be as 

 follows: — The thin walled vesicle or membrane closing the 

 ovariantrichter of Gaffron is honioli)gous with the coelomic 

 end-sac of the renal oi-gans; the portion of the diverticulum 

 which is situated nearest the thin-walled vesicle cori-esponds 

 to tlie renal funnel; the remaining portion of the diverti- 

 culum, the oviducts, and the uteri, would be homologous with 

 the coiled tube and the dilated bladder; and finally, the ecto- 

 dermnl poi-tion of the female genital system would correspond 

 to the short, ectodeiinal duct of the renal organ. 



On the above view of the homology of the parts here con- 

 sidered the receptaculum ovorum is the direct continuation 

 of the oviduct into the terminal end of which it leads. It 

 follows that the renal funnel is not represented by the pore 

 leading from the oviduct into the diverticulum. It may be so 

 represented in other genera of the Peripatidte, but certainly 

 it is not so in Eoperipatus. 



It does not follow from the above view that the cavity of 

 the ovary is a mere continuation of the oviduct. Sedgwick 

 describes the "geruiinal nuclei'^ as appearing in the sixteenth 

 to the twentieth sou)ite, both inclusive. The twenty-first 

 pair of somites, in which germinal nuclei do not appear, are 

 completely used up in the formation of the genital ducts. In 

 this case the ovary formed from the dorsal coelom of several 

 somites becomes grafted— so to speak — on the twenty-first 

 somite. Consequently it can in no way be described as a 

 mere continuation of the oviduct which is developed inde- 

 pendently from a different pair of somites. 



Kennel, differing from Sedgwick, has described the ovary 



