180 



ILLINOIS BIOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS 



[180 



is a possibility that it may be the same. For the present it must be 

 considered to be a species inquirenda. In regard to the name of this 

 species attention is called to the fact that Zschokke wrote the name as 

 a trinomial. Since a trinomial name can have no standing and since 

 Monticelli (1891) first wrote this name as a binomial it is here sug- 

 gested that the name should be credited to him. The species is then to 

 be known as Proteocephalus salmonis-umblae (Monticelli). Pallas (1811- 

 12) is unaccessible to the writer. It appears that his description of 

 Taenia salmonis omul if one were given was of no value. Monticelli 

 (1891) suggested that Taenia salmonis-umhlae was probably identical 

 with the Taenia salmonis-omul Pallas and he called the latter a species 

 dubia. Rudolphi (1819:175) expressed the opinion that Taenia salmonis 

 omul was a species of Bothriocephalus. For this reason it seems that 

 Taenia salmonis omul is hardly of sufficient value as a name to be 

 worthy of being called a species inquirenda and since Monticelli ap- 

 parently desired to bury it with the Taenia salmonis-umhlae it is best 

 not to attempt to resurrect it. La Rue (1911:475) in a list of Proteo- 

 cephalus species credited this species to Monticelli who was the first to 

 give it a binary name. 



PROTEOCEPHALUS OSCULATUS (Goeze), sp. inq. 

 [Figs. 161-165, 182] 



