328 THE ANNELIDA POLYCHAETA. 



is represented in Plate 61, fig. 1. The acicula are blackish and often protrude 

 conspicuously beyond the surface of the parapodia. 



The mandibles are opaque and brown except for anterior tips which become 

 darkened, blackish; the masticatory plate is deeply incised anteriorly and the 

 plate is marked, as is common, with a series of transverse parallel hnes as shown 

 in the figure. The relative width across the anterior end is greater than, e.g., 

 in L. japonica Marenzeller and L. japonica index Moore, (See Plate 60, fig. 6). 

 The maxillae are black; the second pair are provided with four or five teeth 

 (rarely with six), which decrease in size caudad and are of the general form shown 

 in Plate 60, fig. 7; the third pair are conspicuously narrowed into a slender 

 process at the mesal end, and are unidentate. 



The color throughout is a more or less yellowish brown. 



Localities. OfT Mexico: Sta. 3418 (lat. 16° 31' N., long. 99° 52' 30" W.). 

 Depth 660 fms. Bottom of brown sand with black specks. Bottom temp. 

 39° F. 1891 Exped. Two specimens and some fragments. 



Off Mexico: Sta. 3424 (lat. 21° 15' N., long. 106° 23' W.). Depth 679 

 fms. Bottom temp. 38 F. 18 April, 1891. Two specimens. 



Gulf of California: Sta. 3435 (lat. 26° 48' N., long. 110° 45' 20" W.). 

 Depth 859 fms. Bottom of brown mud with black specks. 22 April, 1891. 

 One specimen of about the same size as those from Sta. 4631. 



Between Panama and the Galapagos Islands: Sta. 4631 (lat. 6° 26' N., 

 long. 81° 49' W.). Depth 774 fms. Bottom of green sand. 3 November, 1904. 

 Two smaller specimens, of which the larger has a maximum width of 3.25 mm., 

 exclusive of the parapodia. 



This species seems to occur rather abundantly from southern Chile north- 

 ward at least to Monterey Bay, and its bathymetrical range is also correspond- 

 ingly great, it having been recorded at depths from 36 to 2,182 fms. 



It is characterized by its conspicuously elongate parapodial processes. 

 The maxillae would at first seem to separate these specimens clearly from the 

 form described by Ehlers. In Ehlers's figures, the maxillae are given the form 

 seemingly widely different from that usual in the genus; but an appearance very 

 similar is secured when the pieces are viewed edgewise, and I am incUned to 

 think the artist has so drawn them rather than that the type is abnormal as 

 supposed by Moore. The type is a very small specimen, and proper orientation 

 of the maxillae, if drawn in situ, would be difficult. A specimen of about the 

 same size as Ehlers's type has the prostomium of the more elongate propor- 

 tions given by that author, so it is likely this difference is one due to age. 



