DESCRIPTIONS OF GENERA AND SPECIES 695 



a complete prostomium (the prostomium of L. mollis is figured by Duges (3, PI. i, fig. 2). Rosa 

 believes L. teres to be the same as A. terrestris, in spite of the prostomium. 



Lunibricus valdiviensis (Blanchaed), L. castaneus (Risso), Enterion cinctum (Pitzinger), L. 

 gigantetis (RiSSo), L. cUtellinus (Risso), L. caeruleus (Risso), E. firmatorum (Fitzingek), E. vajpora 

 riorum (Fitzingee), L. roseus (Risso), L. xanthurus (Templeton, 2), L. omilurus (Templeton, 2), 

 L. minor (Johnston, 1), L. lividus (Johnston, 1), L. josephinae (Kinberg), L. m-matus (Kinberg). 

 L. luteus (Blanchaed), L. ephippium (Grube, 7), L. infelix (Kinberg'), L. alyattis^ (Kinberg) 

 are quite unrecognizable species ; tbey all of them appear to be members of the family Lumbricidae, 

 the inference that this is so being derived from their habitat or from the position of the clitellum 

 when given. It is possible that in a few cases Geosoolicids may have been included in this list 

 the clitellum, in that family, is sometimes as posterior in position as it is in the Lumbricidae 

 But, even if this mistake has been made, no great harm will have been done. 



Genus Allurus, Eisen. 



Syn. Iiumbricus, AuCT. (in part.). 



Allolobophora, AuCT. (in part.). 

 Enterion, Sav. (in part.). 

 Depinitiow. Male pores on segment XIII. Clitellum, XXI-XXVII (about). 

 Setae paired. Clitellar setae of peculiar form. 

 The anatomy of this genus has been dealt with principally by myself (46). But 

 the absence of anatomical data respecting several of the reputed species renders it 

 a matter of great difficulty to decide upon the admissibility of some of these. 

 MiCHAELSEN allowed four species, viz. 



(i) Allurus neapolitanus (Oebley). 

 (a) Allurus tetraedrus (Sav.). 



(3) Allurus ninnii (Rosa). 



(4) Allurus hereynius (MiOH.). 



In his recent revision of the Lumbricidae (15) Rosa retains these species, but is 



of opinion that they are probably referable to two only, viz. A. tetraedrus (incl. 



A. hereynius), and A. neapolitanus (incl. A. ninnii). The only difference being in 



each case that the male pores are upon segment xv instead of xiii. 



They are thus distinguished: — 



(i) Allurus tetraedrus. Clit. xxii-xxvii, ToB. pub. xxni-xxvi. 



{a) (? pore on xii, A. tetraedrus. 



(6) (J pore on xv, A. hereynius. 



' The male genital pores are said to be on xvi ; the worm, therefore, may be a Geoseolioid. 

 ■' This is identified by EoSA (15, p. 59) with AUohiopTiora cyanea. 



