Mr. W. Thompson’s Additions to the Fauna of Ireland. 355 
the centre of the body are prettily ramified like those of the genus 
- Glossiphonia, as represented by Moquin-Tandon (Monog. Hirudi- 
nées, pl. 14, 2nd edit.). Outside this central distribution of vessels, 
the body to very near the margin is most minutely and beautifully 
ramified all over :—the whole worm presenting the appearance of 
a Glossiphonia ‘‘ set’’—in jewellers’ language-—in the centre of a 
Planaria, which broadly expands on every side. This appearance is 
literally ‘‘ shadowed forth,” in Sir J. Dalyell’s figure 2. The colour 
of one of my specimens which lived in a phial of sea-water, changed 
about once in thirty-six hours, for twelve days, was during the time 
transparent, with the central Glossiphonia-like vessels whitish; the 
ramifications outside them reddish lilac. 
The motion of these Planarie is ‘‘ very rapid, smooth, continuous 
and even,” as Dr. Johnston describes that of the Plan. subauriculata 
to be (Loudon’s Mag. Nat. Hist. ix. 16. f. 2), and with which spe- 
cies I cannot but consider the P. flevilis identical. The differences 
set forth in Dr. Johnston’s diagnostic characters of the two, are, that 
the body of P. flerilis is ‘‘ semicircular in front,” that of the other 
‘‘ obtuse ;”” and, that the intervening space between the eyes is like 
the rest of the body in P. flexilis, but, that ‘‘a clear circular spot to 
each of the two clusters of eyes” exists in P. subauriculata. The 
individuals examined by me are occasionally obtuse, and occasionally 
semicircular in front, and present themselves exactly of the forms 
represented by both authors, as well as in innumerable other shapes. 
The position of the eyes is the same in both the supposed species ; 
the “‘ clear circular spot” to each cluster may either have escaped 
being recorded by Sir J. Dalyell, or possibly may not have existed 
in his specimens ;—mine have both clusters of eyes within one trans- 
parent circle. On full consideration of the descriptions and figures 
of P. flexilis, Dalyell, and P. subauriculata, Johnston, I cannot— 
although it is opposing my ignorance to Dr. Johnston’s knowledge 
of the subject—believe the species to be distinct. My specimens 
agree about equally well with both species*. Further, it may be 
remarked that my specimens have presented the form of Polycelis 
pallidus, Quatrefages (Ann. Sci. Nat. tome iv. pl. 3. f. 8—1845), to 
which they seem nearly allied: the eyes are just as represented in 
the highly magnified fig. 9 of that species. It was obtained by 
M. Quatrefages on many parts of the coast of Sicily. The P. flevilis 
was procured in the Firth of Forth, and P. subauriculata in Berwick 
bay. 
2, Euphrosina foliosa, Aud. & Edw. Hist. Nat. du Littoral de la 
_ France (Annelides), p. 126. pl. 9. f. 1-4. 
Aug. 26, 1844. A very handsome Aphrodite-looking species +, 
* Having written my friend Dr. Johnston on this subject and requested 
his opinion, he replied :—* On a re-examination of the two Planarie I find 
the distinction attempted to be made between them too fine and uncertain, 
so that I am forced to agree with you in the propriety of uniting them in 
one species,” 
+ It is not however of the family Aphrodisiens, but of the Amphinomiens 
23* 
