A. E. Verrill — North Americmi Cephalopods. 393 



Notes on the visceral anatomy of the male. 



In its anatomy this species resembles Ominastrephes. The brancliial 

 cavity is very large, extending back nearly to the base of the fin ; 

 the median longitudinal septum is far back, gills very long, but not 

 reaching the margin of the mantle, attached nearly to tlie tip ; its 

 structure is like that of Ommastrephes. Liver orange-brown, very 

 large, massive, nearly as in Otnmastrephes., but larger, extending back 

 farther than the base of the fin. The circulatory and renal systems 

 are similar to those of Ommastrep)hes, in most respects. The posterior 

 aorta goes back some distance before it divides, about opposite the 

 base of the fin, into the medio-ventral artery of the mantle, and a 

 caudal artery. Two large ventral renal organs lie below and to each 

 side of the heart, and blend together, in front of it, into a large mass, 

 which has a pointed lobe extending forward ; posteriorly two lobes 

 extend back, as usual, along the posterior venae-cavae. The first 

 stomach is rounded and the second stomach is a large, long-pyriform 

 sac ; the intestine is long, the ink-sac is long-pyriform. The repro- 

 ductive organs are small, indicating that the specimen is still imma- 

 ture, and probably only one year old. The spermary or "testicle" 

 is small (length 18""", diameters 2"'°' and 4"""'), flattened, taj)ering 

 backward, partly enclosed by the hooded portion of the pen, and 

 with the anterior end attached laterally to the posterior end of the 

 CBBcal lobe of the stomach. The prostate gland, vesiculai-seminales 

 and spermatophore-sac are small ; the eiferent duct is long and slen- 

 der, extending forward over and beyond the base of the left gill. 



Moroteuthis, gen. nov. 

 Type, Onychoteuthis (or Lestoteuthis?) robusta, this vol., pp. 246-250. 

 Moroteuthis robusta Verrill, Report of the U. S. Fish Commission for 1879, pp. 

 [65-71], pis. 13 and 14, 1881. 



After referring the type of Lestoteuthis to Gonatus (not of Gray), 

 Professor Steenstrup admits that the gigantic species, L. robusta V., 

 is the representative of a distinct genus, to which he would restrict 

 the name Lestoteuthis. 



But X. ICamtschatica was specially given by me as the type of L^es- 

 toteutJiis, and the characters of the genus were derived entirely 

 from that species, while L. robusta was referred to it only with great 

 doubt, owing to the fact that its armature is almost unknown. 

 Therefore, if Lestoteuthis hereafter becomes a complete synonvm, it 

 should be dropped, when it cannot be kept for its special type-species. 

 For the gigantic species I have proposed (Am. Jour. Sci., xxii, p. 

 298, Oct., 1881,) a new genus, Moroteuthis. 



