. Total length Arms C;,-,) Web(%) Mantle width (%) Suckers, no. Gill filaments thielei 305 mm. 67 51 53 ?40 + 7-8 pelaaiais: Thiele 72(?) (from fig.) 69(?) 46 (fig-) — — Hoyle (text and specimen) 45 66 75 I22(.>) 23 — Ijima and Ikeda 148 64 72 100 32-35 10 Sasaki (1917, 1929) 135 62 52(?) 88 32 10 In addition, the radula and mandibles of thielei and the' Valdivia' specimen are singularly unlike, and the funnel-organ of thielei agrees with that of neither the type of pelagiais nor of the Japanese forms. Too much store need not be set on these characters, especially as only single specimens a

---

. Total length Arms C;,-,) Web(%) Mantle width (%) Suckers, no. Gill filaments thielei 305 mm. 67 51 53 ?40 + 7-8 pelaaiais: Thiele 72(?) (from fig.) 69(?) 46 (fig-) — — Hoyle (text and specimen) 45 66 75 I22(.>) 23 — Ijima and Ikeda 148 64 72 100 32-35 10 Sasaki (1917, 1929) 135 62 52(?) 88 32 10 In addition, the radula and mandibles of thielei and the' Valdivia' specimen are singularly unlike, and the funnel-organ of thielei agrees with that of neither the type of pelagiais nor of the Japanese forms. Too much store need not be set on these characters, especially as only single specimens are involved. In the ' Yaldivia' pelagicus the only useful systematic data we know are of the radula, jaws, general shape and web (as seen in the figure of Thiele, loc. cit. pi. xci, fig. 6). The web is more like that of thielei, about half as long as the arms, not

---

Size: 1699px × 2942px
Photo credit: © The Bookworm Collection / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No

Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1920, booksubjectscientificexpedition