T eredicola typica — W ILSON 
269 
Figs. 13-19. Teredicola typica , female. 13, Oral area in situ , diagrammatic. 14, Mandible apex, ventral. 15, 
Mandible apex, dorsal. 16, Schematic diagram, latero-ventral view, showing arrangement of labrum (dashed lines), 
mandible, first maxilla, and paragnath. 17, Mandible and basal framework overlying first maxilla, showing distor- 
tion due to cover glass pressure. 18, Same as 17, different view. 19, Second maxilla and maxillipeds with skeletal 
framework in situ, viewed from below. 
2 and 5), those of male comparatively and 
actually larger than those of female. Both 
segments of basipod and connecting piece 
well developed; segment 2 usually with slender 
outer seta, otherwise unarmed. Both rami 2- 
segmented, much reduced in size, their length 
less than basipod in female, about same in 
male. Spines modified; flat, with narrow, 
faintly serrate, hyaline membrane on margins; 
usually tipped with free minute point. Setae 
variously developed, tending to have enlarged 
bases, mostly longer than segment, non- 
plumose in female, sparsely so in male. Exo- 
pod segment 1 with single outer spine, endo- 
pod segment 1 unarmed. Number of spines 
on second segment of exopod and endopod 
of both pairs of legs alike in male and female 
and tending to be constant; varying a little 
in size, especially in female; those of male 
larger than those of female (Fig. 6). Number 
of setae of second segment variable, both 
from specimen to specimen and from left to 
right ramus of a pair (Table 1). 
No remnants of other legs in female. In 
male, a group of three setae present on 
slightly produced portion of widened ventral 
plate of third metasomal segment, interpret- 
able as rudiments of leg 3 (Fig. 8). 
VARIATION 
There does not appear to be any question 
that the different lots of specimens examined 
by C. B. Wilson and myself represent the same 
