460 GONIADIDJE. 



The Lijsidice Mahagoni of Claparede (1864) may be included in this species, for the 

 only distinction is the absence of the slight median notch in the anterior border of the 

 snout. 



De Quatrefages (1865) placed this form amongst his Lumbriconereids. 



Bhlers (1868) rightly made considerable reformation in the synonymy of this abundant 

 southern form. Apparently a considerable change is also necessary in the synonymy of 

 foreign species. 



The Lijsidice mavgaritacea of Claparede l from the Mediterranean seems to be closely 

 allied, though the spines are black. 



The Lysidice collaris of Grube 2 from the Red Sea does not appear to differ essentially 

 from L. punctata. The comparatively slight differences existing in the teeth of such 

 species as this, and the close approach in the structure of the bristles and other features, 

 is suggestive. 3 This author 4 considered Risso's L. punctata as identical with L. Mnetta, 

 Aud. and Bdw. 



The occurrence of a Marphysa at Marseilles, viz., M. fallax, Marion and Bobretzky, 5 

 mimicking this species so closely that they are readily confounded, is interesting, whether 

 the form is other than the young of the common Marphysa or not. 



Family XII.— G-oniadid/K, Malmgren, 1865 (=G-oniadba, Kinberg, 1865). 



Cephalic lobe elongate, tapering, with four equal terminal processes. Horny teeth 

 in two to five rows, terminal lateral, dorsal transverse, ventral transverse and radiate. 

 Feet biramous in the middle and posterior part of the body. 



Grube's 6 seventh family, Grlycerea, included both Glycera, Sav., and Goniada, Aud. 

 and Edw. 



Kinberg (1865) made a somewhat minute subdivision of the groups of teeth, which 

 he termed maxillae, ranging them into angular, terminal, lateral, transverse, transverse 

 dorsal, and transverse ventral maxillse. He describes the " branchiae " as terminal, 

 probably referring to the tips of the processes of the feet. He divides the genera 

 according to the presence or absence of the angular teeth into two divisions, and sub- 

 divides by the number of the transverse maxillae and terminal maxillae. 



The view of Ehlers (1868) that Goniada and Glycinde should form one genus has 

 certain recommendations, but it should be remembered that the structure of the dorsal 

 division of the foot, both in soft parts and in bristles, shows a decided divergence, 

 and the same may be said of the teeth. 7 Moreover, Ehlers does not mention that 

 between the body-wall of each of the common forms (Goniada maculata and Glycinde 



1 < Annel. diet. Nap./ p. 143, pi. viii, fig. 3, 1868. 



2 ' Monatsb. Kg]. Akad. Wiss. Berlin/ June, 1869, p. 15 (sep. copy). 



3 Vide, for instance, Marenzeller, ( Sudjap. Annel./ p. 136, Taf. v, fig. 2, 1879. 



4 'Mitth. St. Vaast-la-Hougue/ p. 108. 



5 ( Ann. Sc. nat./ 6 e ser., t. ii, p. 13, 1875. 



6 < Fam. der Annel./ p. 59, 1851. 



7 < "Challenger" Annel./ p. 342. 



