Phyllodoce pulchra. 66 



small, rather distant spots, and a row of large ones on each side at the 

 base of the feet. Head blackish in front, yellow behind, bluntly pointed. 

 Eyes two, black. Mouth surrounded in a stellate manner with four 

 conical white tentacula, and provided with a large retractile proboscis. 

 On each side of the head there are other four white corneal filaments or 

 tentacula, of which the two anterior are the shortest. On each side of every 

 segment is an oval or rather kidney-shaped lamellar process with a brown 

 spot in its centre, and supported on a very short spotted stalk. Beneath 

 these are the feet, each foot consisting of two papillary processes, the 

 anterior bearing a tuft of fine retractile hairs, the posterior simple and 

 conical. The anal segment has neither feet nor branchial process, but 

 is terminated by two conical filaments. 



Obs. This is quite distinct from the Nereis lineata of Montagu, and 

 also from the N. lamelligera of Sowerby. It inhabits the sea shore, and 

 was found burrowing amongst fine sand. 



I have placed these species, without any hesitation, in the genus 

 Phyllodoce, as I understand it to include such Linnean JS'ereides as have 

 a leaf-like process placed over and above the feet. This is mentioned, 

 as, in the characters of the genus given by Lamarck, and borrowed I pre- 

 sume from Savigny, there eire several particulars which were not observed 

 in our species, and which I am confident were not to be found. There is, 

 indeed, some slight difference in our description of the parts about the 

 mouth in the two species, but neither will correspond with Lamarck's 

 characters, and the difference is too trivial to constitute any generic dis- 

 tinction. We have, in conformity with the language of Lamarck, called 

 the leaf-like processes branchial, but is there any good reason for sup- 

 posing them to be so ? or do their assigned functions rest merely on a 

 vague and undefined analogy ? 



In my last paper three species of worms referred to the genus Plan akia 

 were described ; and to them I have now to add four other species which 

 appear as yet to have escaped notice, and which belong to the same 

 group. 



