566 PROFESSOR E. P. WRIGHT ON THE TEREDIDA. 
This species, which I have ventured to place in the genus Kuphus, was taken by Mr. 
Mann from the western jetty of the Peninsular and Oriental Steamship Company’s New 
Harbour of Singapore, in October 1863. For two of these specimens I am indebted to 
the liberality of Mr. Weir: one them (vide Plate LXV. fig. 1) is quite perfect, and is about 
7 inches in length; the valves are about the same size as those of Teredo norvegica, the 
siphonal tubes are separated at their extremities for nearly 1 inch, and when the si- 
phonal palettes are closed are found lying right and left of them. 
The siphonal palettes (figs. 5-8) themselves are very different from those met with in 
Calobates. The style is very feebly developed, and scarcely + inch in length: the ex- 
panded part is of about the same dimensions as in the previous genus, but there is no 
trace of the stilt-like portion : it may, of course, have been broken off; but I do not think 
this is the case. The general appearance of these palettes is like that of K. arenarius 
(figs. 16, 17); but they are of much smaller size, and, while they have all the appearance 
of belonging to a mature animal, are much more rudimentary than those of K. arenarius: 
the difference in the habitat of the two species may in some measure account for this. 
It may be suggested that the palettes of the above-described species, although 
very closely related to those supposed to belong to Kuphus arenarius, resemble also 
in many details those found in Calobates thoracites, Gould (C. furcelloides, Gray), and 
C. australis (n. s.), and that, if the long processes were broken off any of the latter, no 
difference of any importance would be found to exist between them; but it appears 
to me that the difference in the amount of the attachment of the siphonal tubes is one 
of some importance. In the well-known tube of K. arenarius a shelly division exists at 
its lower portioh, dividing it into two parts—one for the branchial, the other for the ex- 
halant siphon ; and this leads one naturally to suppose that the siphonal tubes penetrate 
some distance into these partitions. Now, in Calobates thoracites and C. australis, the 
siphonal tubes are so closely united together, almost to their very tips, that they could 
not separately occupy two distinct shelly partitions in the one shelly tube; and hence I 
infer that this structural difference will be represented in the shelly tubes, if present, 
and will serve to distinguish them from those of the other genus. 
If it should be ultimately found that the animal of K. wrenarius resembles in its ge- 
neral structure that which I have above described as K. ? mannii, then the question will 
still remain, Are these differences of sufficient importance to separate these forms into 
genera or subgenera, or are they only of specific value? Such a question can be decided 
only by and by, when fresh specimens of all the species shall have been collected and 
examined. if 
In the meanwhile, the only forms of siphonal palette at all corresponding to those 
met with in the tubes of Kuphus arenarius that have as yet been discovered are 
those of the species just described, which also possesses siphonal tubes such as, from 
the appearance of the shelly tube of K. arenarius, we should imagine this latter 
mollusk to have; so that I fancy the weight of evidence goes towards proving K. ane 
narius to be the tube of a Lamellibranchiate mollusk closely allied to Kuphus mann. 
If this be so, we still have the strange and anomalous fact of a Teredo living in sand, 
and forming a large external shelly tube to protect itself against its being overwhelmed by 
