Dr. R. Kossman on the Entoniscide. 87 
the two anterior pairs (Fritz Miller probably only overlooked 
the second pair in #. cancrorum) are very strongly developed, . 
and the anterior pair curves forward and upward beneath the 
head, while the hinder pair extends posteriorly. 
With regard to the structure of the head also a difference 
may perhaps exist; at least I do not see that Fritz Miller 
figures or deseribes in L. porcellane the sucker-like cushions 
which Fraisse (4, pl. ii. fig. 6) and Giard (5, pl. xlvi. fig. 5) 
aoe and which are also to be seen in my figure (Pl. IX. 
g. 3). 
As to the specific distinctions within the genus Entione it 1s 
difficult to speak with absolute certainty. . cancrorum is 
very cursorily described, and we have only a sketchy figure 
of an animal not full-grown. But L. Moniezii and EL. Cavo- 
fintt, notwithstanding the details given, are also, even leaving 
out of consideration the errors already mentioned, very un- 
satisfactorily described ; so that it is essentially only on the 
ground of the identity or, at any rate, near relationship of 
the hosts that I can assert with more or less certainty the 
identity of my specimens with the two species above men- 
tioned. The dorsal and ventral regions are repeatedly con- 
founded in Fraisse’s and Giard’s memoirs ; in explanation of 
this I can only suppose that the specimens that those two 
naturalists had before them died in the most unnatural con- 
tortions, and remained in the same after death—to which, 
perhaps, the circumstance that the sac in which the parasite 
is enclosed is killed by the action of spirit earlier than the 
parasite itself, and rendered rigid, may have contributed. 
The position and form that the animal, after being freed from 
this sac, infallibly assumes when in sea-water, and in which 
it remains when killed with alcohol or any thing of the kind, 
is shown in my figure (Pl. IX. fig. 1). 
It will be seen from it that Hntione Monieziz, as also EL. 
Cavolinii, has on the thorax, which otherwise is cylindrical, 
four strong excrescences, which, however, are wanting in 
younger females. Of these excrescences two, forming a pair, 
are placed close together not far behind the cephalic enlarge- 
ment on the back of the animal. In Giard’s scarcely intelli- 
gible figure (5, pl. xlvi. fig. 1) they are marked A 2, and still 
covered by the two posterior brood-leaves, which, however, 
are apparently for the most part cut away. In Fraisse’s 
description and figure I can find no indication of these pro- 
tuberances, which, moreover, cannot be visible in his fig. 5 
(pl. ii.), as they are upon the surface which is turned away. 
Two other protuberances lie, unpaired, one behind the 
other, in the middle line of the ventral surface. They are 
