412 
Types of Ascaris 
the specific name of the former was retained, while that of the latter 
was shown to have been pre-occupied, and the new name rosmari was 
suggested to replace it. 
The remainder of the types have now been studied, as far as the 
material permits, and the following notes are intended to show the 
conclusions reached. Ascaris laevissima, A. bifaria and A. unduloso- 
striata seem to be incapable of support as valid species, and these 
specific names should, in my opinion, lapse for reasons which will be 
stated below. Ascaris bbconica appears to be valid, and it has been 
possible to give a tolerably complete account of its anatomy. Ascaris 
boddaertii probably represents a valid species, but on grounds of anatomy 
it must be removed from the genus Ascaris, sensu strido , and placed 
under the category of Poly del-phis, Dujardin. With regard to the 
remaining form, Ascaris salvini, judgment must be suspended, the sole 
specimen being in too poor a state to admit of anatomical investigation. 
Ascaris laevissima. 
Ascaris laevissima Baird, 1853 a, p. 25, 1853 b, p. 19; PL XXX (Annulosa), Pigs. 1, 
1 a\ 
,, Diesing, 1861, p. 661. 
,, Orley, 1882, p. 310. 
Of this form there is only a single specimen (female) and it is there¬ 
fore impossible to examine it in detail. A study of the general external 
appearance, however, and especially of the shape, size and arrangement 
of the lips, leads me to believe that it is simply an example of Ascaris 
megalocephala 2 (the common Ascarid of the horse) with specimens of 
which T have compared it. The host and origin of the specimen are 
unknown. The “red circular lines at irregular distances” mentioned 
by Baird appear to be “scars” in the cuticle, and are probably of the 
nature of artifacts. The “tubercles,” or rudiments of interlabia, 
between the bases of the lips are a feature of A. megalocephala. The 
fine transverse striations of the cuticle, not mentioned by Baird, seem 
also to agree well with that species. 
The transverse diameter of the dorsal lip was found to be precisely 
the same (1*5 mm.) as in a female A. megalocephala. 
1 Baird’s second description of this form is a repetition of his original diagnosis, with 
some transpositions and slight verbal changes. Orley apparently accepts the species, 
hut gives no description. 
2 Diesing (1861, p. 662) says of this and the following form : “ licet corporis proportionibus 
ah Ascaride megalocephala differant, tamen forma labiorum ita ad earn accedunt, lit haecce 
ires species facile subdivisionem generis Ascaridis propriam constituere videantur.” 
