224 



DR. W. H. BENJIAM OX 



L^'ov. 15, 



Dorsal vessel double ; last lieait in IStli segment. 



Gizzai'd large ; o?sopliagus with 3 pairs of glands, (inite distinct 

 ,and typically developed, situated in segments 13, 14, 15, the last 

 more dorsally placed and smaller than the preceding. 



Sperm-sacs of fair size, in segments 11, 12 ; botryoidal. 



Prostates* normal. Penial chfeta^ delicate, much curved in 

 4in exaggerated S-shape, with the tip spoon-shnped, though^pointed 

 ^vnd curved in side view. 



The spermatkecce are of peculiar form (text-fig. 41, p. 223). 

 Each consists of a bilohed sac ; the two lobes are of about the same 

 ,size and irregularly ovoid, and joined by a short, naiTOW isthmus, 

 whence the muscular duct originates. One might imagine that 

 one lobe is a " diverticulum " in the usual sense, but examination 

 •of stained specimens shows no striictural diffei-ence lietween them ; 



Text-fi2-. 43. 



liraoridrilns man!ens)'s. — Tip of penial cliaita, side view fx 350. Oc. 1, obj. 7, 



camera). 



Text-fifi'. 44. 



JfaoridriJus mauiensis. — Tip of penial ehieta ; view of plane at right angles to the 

 above (? perhaps the extreme tip is injured). 



the epithelium is folded, iri-egulai-, and appai-ently giandulai', as a 

 quantity of stained material is present in the lumen ; I could see 

 no spermatozoa. As a rule, thei-e is a mai-ked difference in 

 .structure between sac and divei-ticulum. Unfortunately the 

 specimen is not sufficiently well preserved to enable me to decide 

 this question. 



At any rate the form of the spermatheca and the arrangement 

 ■of the oesophageal glands mark the species from any of those 

 hitherto described. 



This is the first species of Maoridrilus described from the 

 North Island, and is the only specimen amongst the material I 

 have received from various cori-espondents collected in several 

 widely scattered districts. 



* No doubt Beddard's term " spermiducal gland " is in some respects better, but 

 lit is a clumsy term, and when " duet" is added it is by no means euphonious. 



