212 ALLAN HANCOCK PACIFIC EXPEDITIONS VOL. 7 



dri'cal, without chitinous jaws. First 4 segments more or less fused, pro- 

 vided with 8 pairs of tentacular cirri that project obliquely forward. Par- 

 apodial and anal cirri tentacular, the dorsal ones long, filamentous. 

 Parapodia seemingly uniramous, the notopodium represented only by a 

 long, dorsal cirrus, the neuropodium well developed and with acicula and 

 composite falcigerous setae. Anal ring with 2 long, tentacular cirri. 



Hesione intertexta Grube 



Plate 33, Figs. 30-31 

 Hesione intertexta Grube, 1878, pp. 102-103, pi. 6, fig. 5; Monro, 1926, 



pp. 311-314; 1928, p. 79; 1931, pp. 9-10, fig. 4; 1933, p. 26. 

 Hesione panamena Chamberlin, 1919, pp. 188-190, pi. 22, figs. 9-10; 

 Treadwell, 1937, p. 149. 



Collections.— ^^-ZZ, 134-34, 148-34, 167-34, 213-34, 289-34, 310- 

 35, 336-35, 503-36, 576-36, 585-36, 627-37, 688-37, 719-37, 745-37, 811- 

 38. Numerous specimens. 



Total length 40-50 mm, the largest individual from Consag Rock, in 

 the northern end of the Gulf of California. Most individuals retain the 

 reticulated, fulvous pattern on the dorsum of the anterior segments, but 

 in some there are almost none. There are 16 parapodial segments. Acicula 

 are black, setae pale. The 8 pairs of tentacular cirri are long, directed an- 

 teriorly. Prostomial antennae are minute, not easily distinguished. 



Parapodia have 2 elongated lobes, preacicular and postacicular, at 

 their dorsodistal edge (pi. 33, fig. 30). Composite neuropodial setae have 

 a guard which approaches the apical tooth (pi. 33, fig. 31). The signifi- 

 cance of the relation of guard to apical or subapical tooth has been care- 

 fully studied by Monro (1926, p. 311). The specimens here examined 

 were surprisingly uniform with respect to this character. 



Distribution. — Philippine Islands; South Sea islands; China; Gala- 

 pagos and Cocos islands; Panama; western Mexico; Gulf of California, 

 north to Consag Rock. Subintertidal, to 25 fms. 



Genus LEOGRATES Kinberg 

 Plate 33, Figs. 32-35 

 Leocrates chinensis Kinberg, 1866, p. 244; 1910, p. 57, pi. 23, fig. 7; 

 Ehlers, 1901, pp. 83-84, pi. 11, figs. 10-15; Horst, 1924, pp. 193- 

 194; Monro, 1926, p. 313; 1931, p. 12. 

 ILeocrates daparedii Fauvel, 1919, p. 371 (synonymy) ; 1923, pp. 237- 

 238, fig. 88; 1930, p. 12; 1932, p. 61; 1933, pp. 44-45; Day, 

 1934, p. 33; Okuda, 1937, pp. 270-271, figs. 11, 12. 



