250 ILLINOIS BIOLOGICAL MONOGRAPHS [250 



Upon request Doctor Smith sent some of this material to Professor 

 Ward who has very kindly permitted the writer to study it. Study of 

 this material has shown that it belongs to the species Crepidohothrium 

 gerrardii. La Rue (1911:479-480) gave the synonymy of this species 

 briefly and stated some of his findings. 



A comparison of the diagnoses of Diesing (1850:511 and 1864:82) 

 with the description by Baird (1861) and with the description by 

 Monticelli (1899:9-25) leaves no ground for doubt that these investi- 

 gators were reporting the same species. In certain respects the descrip- 

 tion by Smith (1908:39-41) differs radically from that of Monticelli. 

 However an examination of Smith's material has shown that Smith 

 made numerous misinterpretations which are the cause of the apparent 

 discrepancies between his work and Monticelli 's. In his study of this 

 form the writer has found Monticelli correct in the main. It has al- 

 ready been stated that Shipley's material belonged to C. gerrardii. 



The question concerning the correct name for this species must be 

 settled. From a structural point of view this species cannot be retained 

 in the genus Taenia nor in the genus Tetrabothrium. Anatomically 

 this species is one of the Proteocephalidae. This has been recognized 

 by Liihe (1898), Fuhrmann (1899), and Monticelli (1899). The name 

 which Fuhrmann (1899:864) gave for it can be dismissed as a nomen 

 nudum. Liihe (1898 and 1899) considered that the species belonged to 

 Ichthyotaenia. It has already been shown in the discussion of the genus 

 Proteocephalus that the name Ichthyotaenia Lonnberg (1894) is a syn- 

 onym of the name Proteocephalus Weinland (1858) and hence cannot 

 be retained. The latter name also antedates the name Crepidobothriura 

 Monticelli (1899) and on that account should be used in place of Crepi- 

 dobothrium if structurally Baird 's species shows sufficient agreement 

 with Taenia filicollis (amhigua) Rud. the type of Proteocephalus. An 

 examination of Monticelli 's (1899) description and figures and of the 

 writer's description with its accompanying figures, shows conclusively 

 that this species does not agree anatomically with the type of Proteo- 

 cephalus and that this species really belongs to a different genus. The 

 only available name is Crepidohothrium Monticelli (1899) which is not 

 invalidated by the name Crepibothrium as used by Fuhrmann and 

 which was unaccompanied by a diagnosis, since the word Crepibothrium 

 is not a homonym of Crepidohothrium. Liihe 's objection therefore is 

 not valid. 



One bottle of 9 specimens with heads, labelled ^^Ichthyotaenia 

 Gerrardii (Baird) ? aus Eunectes murinus intestinum Berlin Aquarium" 

 was received from Dr. Anton Collin, Berlin, in answer to a request from 

 Professor Ward. This is now No. 10.179 in Professor Ward 's collection. 



