OCR Text |
Show 212 MR. F. E. BEDDARD ON THE OLIGOCH.ETE [Mar. 6, Firstly, Metschaina, tanganyikce has a definite spermathecal sac which I have already described ; secondly, the worms which I have examined are near to maturity, and not in the very young stages described by m e in Eudrilus. Thirdly (perhaps), there is no trace of any sac involving the ovaries. This argument will be clear if the comparison be made with the developmental figures in my paper upon Eudrilus quoted. In comparing more exactly the female reproductive system of this genus with that of Eudriloides, to which it obviously bears a closer likeness than to that of any other genus of Eudrilid, there are differences to be noted. In Eudriloides durbanensis, for example, the oviduct, although, as in the present species, it perforates the septum dividing segments xiii./xiv. twice, depending, therefore, as a loop into segment xiii., has no muscular sheath and is a delicate tube as in so many earthworms. In the present species the oviducal tube is thickly ensheathed with muscular fibres. The male organs furnish the principal reason which leads m e to refer this worm to the genus Metschaina,. There are, contrary to what is found in Eudriloides*, two pair of testes, which lie, of course, in segments x. and xi. The funnels are opposite to them. The funnels face the opposite wall of the segments into which they open. There is no turning round and facing back into the segment behind such as occurs in several Eudrilidae. The sperm-ducts retain their individuality, and after perforating the sheath of the atria on each side open into the caecal extremity of that gland. The two atria or spermiducal glands are quite separate, though opening by the same external pore. The penial seta of each side is long and runs obliquely through two segments. I a m unable to describe its pattern, as I could not reproduce the whole of it from the sections. The sjwrm-sacs of this Eudrilid are, as is so often the case, attached to the front walls of segments xi. and xii. The above-given account of this species justifies rne, as I think, in regarding it as a new species of Metschaina. I do not, however, think it desirable to draw up a diagnosis for comparison with that given by Michaelsen for the other species of the genus, since I am unable to speak positively upon certain features of importance for systematic purposes. The principal points characterising the present species which I have ascertained appear to be the following :-The calciferous glands are more numerous. There are dorsal pores present. The actual form of the oviduct also is not as Michaelsen has described and figured it for Metschaina suctoria. Ocnerodrilus (Ilyogenia) cunningtoni, sp. n, Of this species several examples were preserved. They were * It must be recalled, however, that occasionally two pairs of testes have been found in an apparent Eudriloides (cf. Beddard, Q. J. M . S. xxxvi., n. s. p. 212). |