510 



T. H. BURLEND ON THE UROGENITAL [Mar. 1, 



Plate XLI. 



Fig. 



1. Glyphodes xanthostola. $. 



2. Potyt/ilipta camptozona. ^ . 



3. Lepi/rodes argyrosticta. £ . 



4. Croeidophoraflavicilia.ta. $ 



5. ,, caffralis. $ . 



6. PJilyctcenodes a rgyrostacta. 



7. „ flyvinigralis. 



8. Noorda rubricostalis. $. 



9. Macna hampsoni. ^ . 



10. Iclinetunenoptera cyanescens. 



11. Lepidopoda fulvipes. $ . 



12. Melittia auriphimia. $ . 



13. Dalaca stictigrapha. £. 



14. Polyptychic ba.vteri. $ . 



15. Philotherma fnscescem, <J. 





16. Gonometa drucei. ^ . 



17. Lepidopoda flampalpis. (?. 



18. , ,, obliquizona. <? 



19. Melittia ignidiscata. $. 



20. Dalaca holophcea. $. 



21. Macalla melanohasis. (J . 



22. Glyphodes mayottalis. <J . 



23. Pyrausta rufilineilis. $ . 



24. Criopthona sabulosalis. (J 



25. Rhodoneura discata. $. 



26. Sylepta megastigmalis. £. 



27. Constantia aglossalis. $ . 



28. Bostra tenebralis. $. 



29. Altha tegula. c? • 



2. The Urogenital Organs of Chbncera monstrosa. By T. H. 

 Buklend, M.A. (Camb.), B.Sc. (Lond.), late Scholar of 

 Christ's . College, Cambridge ; Assistant Lecturer and 

 Demonstrator in Zoology, University College, Cardiff'.* 



[Received February 12, 1910.] 



(Text-figures 40-53.) 



Introdioction. 



The study of the structure of the Chimseroids is full of interest 

 on account of the diversity of opinion which exists with regard 

 to the relationship of the Holocephali to the Elasmobranchii. 

 Although retaining many primitive characters in the skeleton, 

 brain, sense-organs, and viscera, the Holocephali have nevertheless 

 acquired very specialised structures presumably associated with 

 their occurrence and mode of life. Referring more particularly 

 to the urogenital organs and their accessory parts, the Chimeeroid 

 is unique among Fishes in the possession in the male of a pair of 

 " middle claspers," — regarded by T. J. Parker (1886) as a rudi- 

 mentary third pair of limbs, — and in the female of a so-called 

 " receptaculum seminis," mentioned by Leydig (1851) and by 

 subsequent writers, 



Notwithstanding the excellent contributions of Leydig and 

 Hyrtl over fifty years ago, and the more recent work of Mazza 

 and Redeke, it was felt that a more detailed account, with figures, 

 of the urogenital organs of Chimcera is not readily accessible to 

 English readers, and it was to supply this want that the work 

 was primarily undertaken. Further investigation showed that 

 the published accounts were at variance on points of the first 

 importance, and this fact can now be attributed to : (1) the use 

 of imperfectly preserved material, and (2) the structural dif- 

 ferences existing between animals which are immature and those 



* Communicated by Professor W. N. Paeker, Ph.D., F.Z.S. 



