REPORT THE ANNELIDA. 
113 
The ventral region of the foot forms in antero-posterior view a broad process, the 
extremity sloping from the rounded tip downward and backward. The dull yellowish 
bristles have long straight shafts with comparatively short tips, which are boldly bifid 
after the manner of Harmothoe marphysw. The bifurcation (PI. VIIIa. fig. 14) shows a 
stout terminal or main division, and a well developed inferior one, the spinous rows 
beneath being proportionately large, and resembling those of Lepidasthenia, as is apparent 
in the antero-posterior view (PI. VIIIa. fig. 15) of one of the same group, viz., the longer 
forms toward the upper part of the division. 
The larger specimen had a considerable quantity of pale brownish ova attached to the 
dorsal surface of the posterior feet, extending beyond as well as elevating the scale-margins. 
The cuticle of the body, especially that of the ventral surface, is remarkably thick ; 
indeed it is considerably thicker than the hypoderm of the same region even in the middle 
line. The area between the oblique muscles is well marked, and the somewhat ovoid 
nerve-cords are distinct. They are bounded internally by a firm investment of con- 
nective tissue. In one example a few ova occurred in the perivisceral cavity. The 
structure of the body-wall is clearly defined and firm. 
In transverse section [in situ) the proboscis shows a deep median longitudinal groove 
externally, situated somewhat nearer the dorsal than the ventral pole. Such is by no 
means common in the group. 
The striped condition of this species is interesting in connection with the prevalence 
of conspicuously striped leeches in the fresh waters of Australia. 
The foregoing form appears to be closely connected with the Lepidonotus striatus of 
Kinberg,^ who found an imperfect specimen off Port Jackson, Australia, with thirteen 
pairs of scales. His figure, however, indicates that the anterior eyes are dorsal in position, 
and they are considerably smaller than in the examples from the Challenger. He does 
not refer to the peculiar condition of the dorsal cirri, and the outline of the foot is 
somewhat different, especially in the slope of the distal margin and in the brevity of the 
ventral cirrus. His figures of the bristles are also more or less at variance, and he appears 
to have selected one of the shortest dorsal forms. It is possible, however, that many of 
these differences are due to his artist. There is little in the description of Grube’s Polynoe 
fulvovittata,‘^ from Pandanon in the Philippines, to distinguish it either from the 
Challenger form or Kinberg’s. It is true he speaks of eighteen scales only, but then 
his specimen was imperfect posteriorly. On the other hand, his figure of the scale is 
identical even to the occurrence of the scar of attachment between the two outer 
brown bands. He thinks the species approaches Halosydna. The Polynoe australis of 
Schmarda,^ from Port Jackson, likewise comes near Polynoe platy cirrus in the structure 
of the bristles, but the author does not mention the condition of the scales. 
2 Ann el. Fauna der Philippinen, p. 33, Tab. iv. fig. 1. 
1 Freg. Eugen. Resa, &c., p. 14, Tab. iv. fig. 18. 
^ Neue wirbell. Tliiere, I. ii. p. 154. 
(ZOOL. CHALL. EXP. — PART XXXIV. 1885.) 
LI 15 
