16 



In 1892 I published an essay: »Bhisorhina Ampeliscce n. gen. n. sp. En ny til 



Herpyllobiidce n. fam. 1i0rende Copepod, snyltende paa Ampelisca laevigata Lilljeb. (Entomol. 

 Meddelelser, 3. B. 5. Hefte p. 207—34, Tab. Ill), which in the first place contains a detailed 

 description of the above-mentioned new and very curious form, in the second place makes 

 an important contribution to the knowledge about Herpyllobius Stp. and Ltk.; finally the 

 new family Herpyllohiidce is established, and the genera — seven in all — which can with 

 more or less certainty be referred to it, are grouped together. Two of these genera, 

 Troplwniphila M' Intosh and Oestrella M' Intosh, are described so defectively that we prefer 

 not to consider them in this place. The female of the other five genera has a globular or 

 oblong body without any vestige of mouth or limbs; posteriorly are two genital apertures, 

 each with its ovisac. The front part of the female of Bhizorhina forms a short, slender 

 stalk, which pierces the skin of the gill of its host; the inside of this stalk consists of two 

 tubes. Just beneath the skin of its host the stalk expands very much, the tubes are consi- 

 derably dilated, they separate and ramify irregularly throughout the gill, even entering 

 somewhat into the body of the host. In the genera Herpyllobius Stp. and Ltk. and Eury- 

 silenium M. Sars, the stalk, which consists of a single tube, is found on the ventral side of 

 the body, pierces the skin of its host and expands inside it like a collar, but this collar is 

 surrounded by the root of a large, oblong, foliaceous or irregularly sausage-shaped body, 

 which is decidedly homologous with the tubes of the Bhizorhina, and, like these, has the 

 function of drawing nourishment from the host to the external, limbless body, whose business 

 it is to develop the eggs. In Saccopsis Lev. and Bradophila Lev. Levinsen has indeed found 

 the stalk, but no body at the expanded end of it in the body of the host. However, he had 

 but slight material of both forms to work with, so I will now state as my personal opinion, 

 that a body, or one or two tubes, may have proceeded from the stalk into the body of the 

 host; otherwise it would be impossible to understand how the parasites could get their food. 

 Moreover, I may mention that, when (in Nov. 1896) I spoke to the author, Inspector 

 G-. M. R. Levinsen, about the matter, he felt inclined to share my opinion. Griard and Bonnier 

 (in their above-mentioned paper) describe a new parasite, Salenshya tuberosa, of which a 

 single specimen was found on Ampelisca spinipes Boeck from Croisic, They confess (p. 474) 

 that it »presente certainement une tres grande ressemblance avec Bhizorhina ampelisece .... 

 et" nous avons longtemps hesit6 a maintenir le genre Salenshya, cree par nous [in the preli- 

 minary note] quelques mois apres la publication du travail de Hansen«. Still they think 

 they are justified in maintaining it, »au moins provisoirement«, on the following basis: 



»Au lieu d'etre fixe a son hote par des racines rappelant un peu celles de Sacculina, 

 ou par un renflement comparable a celui des Herpyllobius, la femelle de Salenshya possede 

 un appareil chitineux special, qu'on pourrait rapprocher plutot de celui de Saccopsis terebettidis 



figure par Levinsen « (p. 475). I have just spoken of Saccopisis, and I will now express 



my opinion that if a specimen of Salenshya is found again on Amp. spinipes, and the part 

 of the host occupied by the parasite is cut off, this part will contain internal tabes exactly 



