| 1915.] J. STEPHENSON : Indian Oligochaeta. 4I 
The condition is therefore to be regarded, wherever found, as temporary only; the 
specimen from which Southern has illustrated the pharynx in his account of Grania 
maricola is in this condition (16) 
ON THE OCCURRENCE OF SETAE IN THE BODY-CAVITY IN ENCHYTRAEIDS. 
In the description below of Fridericia carmichaeli, reference is made to aggrega- 
tions of setae and setal fragments in segments vii—ix, surrounded by masses of 
coelomic corpuscles. These were present in all the specimens examined, and are 
therefore, it would seem, not accidental but a regular character of the worm. The 
condition is represented in fig. 4. The masses of setae and corpuscles occupy the 
hinder and upper parts of the segments, the posterior septum of the segment often 
forming a sort of pocket, more markedly bulged backwards than in the specimen 
selected for illustration. The setae are in the actual specimens much more conspicu- 
ous than appears from the figure, where they are not distinguished by differential 
shading from the masses in which they are embedded; in reality they stand out by 
their brightness very markedly; the small circles in segment viii in the figure are 
setae or fragments cut transversely. 
The fragments are of all sizes and thicknesses, from fully developed and 
normally shaped setae downwards. Some are miniature setae of the ordinary shape; 
some are spicule or needle-like, mere straight rods, often much thinner than ordinary 
setae, and perhaps longer too; some are stout and blunt, some stout and sharp; 
some are hooked at the end, others not. Along with the setae there also occur in 
the mass numbers of black granules. In places the masses appear to be limited by 
a membrane formed of flat cells—presumably the modified coelomic corpuscles of 
the surface of the mass. 
The above appearances brought to my mind a curious condition I found on a 
previous occasion in a specimen of Enchytraeus harurami, which I did not describe 
in my account of the worm (22), but which may perhaps find mention here. Dor- 
sally situated under the body-wall, to which it was adherent, was a large sac contain- 
ing much granular matter (apparently disintegrating cells), one large normally shaped 
seta, a number of normally shaped but smaller setae, and many incomplete setae— 
minute fragments only. The capsule or enclosing membrane of this tumour,—for 
this seemed the best word to apply to it,—may have been, as I was inclined to 
regard it at the time, the distended setal sac itself; or as in the case of Fridericia 
carmichaeli the mass may have consisted essentially of coelomic corpuscles, and the 
sac wall may have been produced by the modification of an outer layer of the cor- 
puscles. But a difference between the two cases is that in the Enchytraeus, so far 
as I know, the appearance was confined to a single specimen. 
Another case which may possibly be comparable in some degree with the above 
is that of Granta maricola' described by Southern (16). Here ‘‘in addition to the 
! Michaelsen (15) considers this form to belong to the genus Michaelsena; for convenience however 
I here retain the author’s name for it, 
