432 THE AMERICAN NATURALIST. [Vor. XXXVI. 
ciliated canals leading from the cerebral sense organs were in 
other species of nemerteans looked upon as excretory canals. 
The figures of the proboscis with its single central stylet and 
large glandular masses on each side are quite characteristic. 
McIntosh (73) gives a good description of the general anat- 
omy of this species and an interesting account of its behavior 
in confinement, as well as the method of deposition of its ova. 
He also briefly describes the segmentation of the egg and 
gives several figures of the developing embryos. There is a 
good colored drawing of the living worm and figures illustrat- 
ing the anatomy of the anterior portion of the body and of 
the proboscis, all of which are described in detail. 
In 1874 Dieck (74) found at Messina (where Kólliker's speci- 
mens of N. carcinophilos were obtained) a number of nemer- 
teans among the egg masses of Galathea strigosa. But Dieck's 
description does not apply to any of the metanemerteans, and 
the species was named Cephalothrix galatheg. The species 
agrees fully with Kolliker's JV. carcinophilos in size, form, and 
color of body, in not having the head demarcated from body, 
in having two comma-shaped eyes in front of the ganglia, and 
in the absence of cerebral sense organs and cephalic furrows. 
In all these respects the description exactly corresponds with 
that of JV. carcinophilos, but Dieck describes certain other 
anatomical peculiarities which separate the two forms widely, 
and certain others which have been found in no other nemer- 
tean. The proboscis is described as being without stylets, 
and the mouth is said to lie behind the brain. Dieck fur- 
ther describes remarkable appendages on the head which are 
believed to aid the worm in retaining its position on the crab. 
These *fingerfórmige Greif oder Haftorgane . . . sind so con- 
tractil, dass sie nur bei starker Ausdehnung deutlich ins 
Auge fallen " (74, p. 502) ; but he shows no indication of them 
in any of his figures. It seems possible that they may have 
been formed by a too severe pressure on the glass covering 
the worms, and thereby rupturing the integument. Dieck 
thinks he may have seen similar appendages on the posterior 
end of the single male which he found, but he could not be 
certain whether he saw them or not. 
