488 MR. F. E. BEDDARD ON THE [DeC. 4> 



in fact be distinguished by the characters of the reproductive organs 

 (see p. 490). These points are evidently appreciated by Vejdovsky ', 

 who suggests that Tubifex benedii may be a synonym ot CUtellio 

 arenarius. This is probably an error in printing ; there can be little 

 doubt that Yejdovsky meant to place T. benedii as a synonym of 

 CUtellio ater, an identity which lias been pointed out by Vaillant ". 



U'Udekem gives a woodcut illustrating the papillae of his Tubifex 

 benedii, and there is no doubt in my mind about the identity of this 

 species with Claparede's CUtellio ater, which, however, as will be 

 pointed out later, is not a CUtellio at all. 



The remaining species — Tubifex hijalinus — is very probably the 

 same as CUtellio arenarius. There is at any rate nothing to be 

 said against this identification ; and it is more probable that the 

 species is a CUtellio than a Limnodrilus, for the reason that the 

 latter genus is, so far as is certahily known, an inhabitant of fresh 

 water ^. 



The preliminary list of the marine fauna of Plymouth, published 

 in the second number of the ' Journal of the Marine Biological 

 Association,' contains a single Oligochete, Tubifex lineatus. This 

 species, if it be identical with that described in Johnston's ' Catalogue 

 of British Non-parasitical Worms ' (p. 66), is certainly not a Tubifex, 

 since the setse are there stated to be entirely /-shaped, but not bifid ; 

 this may be due to wear, and the species is perhaps a CUtellio, 

 j)0ssibly the same as CUtellio arenarius. This species, however, as 

 well as Tubifex bilineata and T. pellucidus, all of which are recorded 

 from Devon in Parfitt's ' Catalogue of the Annelids of Devon,' 

 reqiiire investigation. Parfitt mentions the occurrence of CUtellio 

 arenai'ius ^. 



Peloryctes inquilina has been described somewhat fully by 

 N. Zenger " ; the species is not referred to by Vejdovsky in his account 

 of the Tubificidse, though the paper is quoted in his list of hterature. 

 Having been at some trouble to translate certain portions of Zenger's 

 paper from the Russian, I can offer the following remarks upon 

 its systematic position. 



The species occurs in the " Kieler Bucht " at a depth of 12 

 fathoms, either living freely in the mud or sand or upon the shell of 

 Mytilus edulis. Prof. Mobius, who first found the worm, considered 

 it to be identical with Claparede's CUtellio ater. It is of a dark red 

 colour, owing to its red blood and the dark papillte on the surface. 

 Zenger considers that the papillae distinguish this species from 

 CUtellio ater, both in their distribution and in their structure. In 

 C. ater " the first head-segment is never covered by papillae, and half 

 the second segment as far as the set^e is also free from papillae ; 

 papillae are in addition absent from the space extending from the 

 10th to the 12th segment, which is occupied by the clitellum . .. . ; 



1 Syst. u. Morph. d. Oligochaeten, p. 45. 



^ Essai de Classification des Annelides Lombriciens," Ann. Sci. Nat. (Zoo- 

 logie), t. X. (1868), p. 251. 



^ Foi-el (Bull. Soc. Vaud. xiii.), however, describes a CUtellio from the Lake 

 of Geneva [rf. footnote to p. 494). 



* Trans. Devon. Assoc. 1867, vol. ii. 



5 Bull. Soc. Imp. Nat. Mo.seou, 1870. 



