686 MB. F. E. BEDDARD ON NEW [DeC. 20, 



finds that in his species the gizzard is a mere rudiment in the four- 

 teenth segment, in front of which (in segment xiii.) are a pair of 

 calciferous glands not refered to by Perrier. 



In all these points, with one exception, my " Perionyx excavatus'^ 

 agrees with Michaelsen's species ; I can distinguish no marked 

 difference of any kind between these worms, except in size, and the 

 size is after all not so marked as to lead to the opinion that it is an 

 index of specific distinction — 1 10 mm. as compared to 85 mm. In 

 the more detailed description which follows of the male pores there 

 may indeed appear to be a little difiference, but I am uncertain how 

 far to refer this to defective preservation of the P.gruenewaldi. The 

 exception to which I have referred concerns the gizzard ; this organ 

 in the worms examined by myself and referred to Perrier's P. ex- 

 cavatus is rudimentary indeed, but such as it is it appears to lie in 

 the sixth segment, as it does in the two other species to be described 

 presently. 



Rosa gives some account of a worm from Burmah ^ which he 

 identifies with Perionyx excavatus of Perrier ; he points out that 

 the gizzard is situated anteriorly, and not, as Perrier stated, in the 

 xiith segment ; Rosa, however, makes no mention of the calciferous 

 glands, nor of the genital setse. The description of the male pores 

 agrees with Perrier's description and with the appearance of these 

 pores in the worms which I am disposed to identify with Perrier's 

 Perionyx excavatus, A very characteristic feature of the latter was 

 the absence of any diverticulum of the spermatotheca ; with regard 

 to Perionyx excavatus VevYiex remarks (Joe, cit, p. 129), " les poches 

 copulatrices sont situees dans les anneaux sept et huit ; elles m'out 

 paru formees d'un simple sac piriforme." I take it that this 

 sentence implies the absence of any diverticula. On the other 

 hand, Michaelsen refers to diverticula in his Perionyx gruenewaldi 

 and P. sansiharicus. This seems, at any rate, to be a good distinction 

 between the two species. 



I have received from Seebpore examples of a species of Perionyx 

 which appears to be different from Perionyx excavatus ; it is certainly 

 different from the worm.s identified as such by myself ; but aa Perrier's 

 account is incomplete in one or two points, it is a little difficult to 

 be absolutely certain. These examples were rather stouter in build 

 than the Manila worms, and the coloration was a little less marked ; 

 this, however, may be the effect of the corrosive sublimate used in 

 the preparation of them. In the internal anatomy this species is to 

 be distinguished by five differences from the Manila species ; these 

 are as follows . — 



The gizzard is fairly well marked and lies in the vith segment ; 

 there are no calciferous glands at all, though the oesophagus is 

 somewhat folded and vascular posteriorly. The last pair of hearts 

 lie in the xiiith segment ; in the form from Manila the twelfth 

 segment is the last which contains a pair of hearts; nothing is said 

 upon this point by either Perrier or Rosa. The spermatothecse are, 

 as in the other species (excepting P, sansiharicus), two pairs and they 



'■ Loc. cit. 



