AVIAN CESLODES. 887 
paruterine organ in Chapmania lends some support to a 
comparison ; for it is as wideas the medullary parenchyma, which 
it entirely fills anteriorly, thus contrasting. with the much 
narrower paruterine organ as figured in Jdiogenes. I should also 
add that the supposed paruterine organ of Otiditenia has no 
line of demarcation from the uterus such as is figured by Clere in 
Chapmania. As points of minor importance, the uterus is lobate 
in Chapmania and ends much further forward in the segment 
than it does in Ofiditenia. The ripe and detached proglottid 
figured by Fuhrmann * is apparently not unlike that of 
Otiditenia. But it may be seen that the paruterine organ is 
more or less completely filled with the ripe embryos, whereas 
in Otiditenia as I have mentioned, the ripe embryos are not 
scattered throughout the whole of the supposed paruterine 
organ. 
The testes of Chapmania are described as being dorsal, whereas 
in Otiditenia they are posterior, and no more dorsal than ventral. 
Concerning the muscular system of the genus Chapmania, there 
is a difference of opinion between Fuhrmann and Clere. The latter 
regards it as feebly developed, the former as strong; in the latter 
event Otiditenia agrees with Chapmania. One would like to 
know something of the genera Ascometra and Schistometra of 
Cholodkovsky, which are to me at present merely names, being 
included in a Russian catalogue of parasitic worms’. As these 
genera occur in Bustards they are quite possibly Davaineids. I 
do not attempt to redefine Otiditenia until I learn whether it be 
held by others that the paruterine organ described above is a 
structure referable to that category, and therefore of great 
importance as a generic character among the Davaineide, to 
which family I now distinctly refer Oliditenia. 
* Res. Swed. Zool. Exp. Egypt, Pt. mi. No. 27, p. 22, fig. 16, 1909. 
+ Cf. Zool. Rec. 1912. 
