11] PROTEOCEPHAUDAE — LA RUE 11 



aculeaius and so far as the writer can discover there have been almost 

 no records of collection of parasites from that host since Dujardin. The 

 diagnoses of Taenia filicollis much resemble those of Taenia ambigua. 

 Dujardin however evidently considered these two species as different 

 for he records both. At the present time but a single species is well 

 known from Gasterosteous, viz, Proteocephalus ambiguus (Dujardin). 

 yyThe writer considers however that P. ambiguus is identical with P. 

 filicollis (Rud.) and hence the genera Proteocephalus Weinland and 

 Ichthyotaenia Lonnberg being based on the same species are synonyms 

 and the earlier name should be retained. 



The synonymy of the name Tetracotylus Monticelli (1891) has not 

 yet been discussed. This name was based on the description of Taenia 

 coryphicephala altho Monticelli failed to designate it as the type species. 

 Braun (1894-1900) stated that this genus was based on T. coryphiceph- 

 ala and this action was considered by Hall (1910) to be tantamount 

 to the designation of a type. Braun regards Tetracotylus to be a syno- 

 nym of Ichthyotaenia which makes it a synonym of Proteocephalus pro- 

 vided that the type of Tetracotylus belongs in the same genus with 

 Taenia filicollis (Rud.), the type of Proteocephalus. That Tetracotylus 

 coryphicephala does not belong to the same genus with Proteocephalus 

 filicollis has been shown by the writer in the descriptive study of the 

 former species (vide infra). Moreover the writer has shown that this 

 form does not belong with any genus of cestodes at present known. It 

 is then necessary to examine into the status of the name Tetracotylus as 

 a generic name for Taenia coryphicephala. 



The availability of Tetracotylus has been questioned because of the 

 name Tetracotyle Filippi (1854), These two names are not spelled alike 

 and are therefore not homonyms, Braun (1894-1900) suggests that 

 Tetracotylus has been used for Tetracotyle. If such improper use has 

 been made of the former name prior to the time when Monticelli pro- 

 posed it then Tetracotylus has been rendered unavailable. The writer 

 has not been able to find evidence of such improper use, yet because of 



^Braun's statement of the fact and his objection to the use of the name 

 ^Xwthe writer has proposed the name Monticellia in honor of Professor Mon- 



< ticelli who has done so much for our knowledge of this group, as a name 

 to take the place of the invalidated Tetracotylus, The type of this 

 genus is Monticellia coryphicephala (Monticelli), 



The genus is to be defined thus : Monticellia La Rue : Head 

 small, globose, without folds or lappets of tissue encircling suckers. 

 Suckers sessile and without accessory areola. No rostellum. Testes, 

 vitellaria and uterus entirely outside of the inner longitudinal muscle- 

 sheath. Vitellaria composed of scattered follicles which form broad 



