Dr. Murai Éva szerk.: Parasitologia Hungarica 18. (Budapest, 1985)

the beginning, the uterus has a form of a long, transverse, entire band of cells, than it takes the form of a transverse tube, finally forming numerous, blind, sometimes branched diverticles" (see SPASSKY, 1951). At this place we note that the descriptions of the uterus by BAER (1924, 1927), JOYEUX and BAER (1936) and SPASSKY (1951) do not conform with the figure of the uterus published by STIEDA (1862) in the first publication of form of the uterus of P. omphalodes. Such descriptions are no better than the bad interpretation of the uterus of P. omphalodes by LÜHE (1910). LOPEZ-NEYRA (1954) classified the genus Paranoplocephala Lühe, 1910 as the subgenus of the genus Anoplocephala Blanchard, 1848. YAMAGUTI (1959) stated in his redescription of Paranoplocephala characterization that "gravid uterus transverse, with numerous outgrowths . He assigned to this genus the same species as RAUSCH (1946-1954) and added also A. bairdi Schad, 1954 = P. bairdi (Schad, 1954). TENORA (1976) used SPASSKY'

s (1951) concept for the characterization of the genus Para noplocephala, but, consistently with RAUSCH (1952 a), pointed out that "this genus appears to be heterogeneous and some species of this genus were not described completely and should be revised. This concerns primarily the species lacking an exact description of uterus". In contrast with the previous authors, he transferred the species Paranoplocephala indica Sawada et Papasarathorn, 1966 to the genus Flabelloskrjabinia Spassky, 1951. The same procedure was also used by RAUSCH (1976). Until 1976, the genus Paranoplocephala had been placed in the subfamily Anoplocephalinae Blanchard, 1891 sensu Spassky, 1951 on the basis of the known characterization of the uterus, published for the first time by LÜHE (1910) (but in an erroneous sense of word): "The uterus of younger developmental stages has the character of a transverse tubus and gradually forms numerous sacculations". In 1976, RAUSCH radically changed the opinion on the characterization of the genus Parano plocephala Lühe, 1910. He restored the genus Anoplocephaloides Baer, 1924, to which he transferred many species of the genus Paranoplocephala. He redescribed the genus Parano- cephala and characterized the uterus as follows: Uterus at first rod-like, transverse, becoming reticulate and developing anterior and posterior sacculations". Due to this characterization, particularly to the reticular character of the uterus during its development, the genus Paranoplocephala sensu Rausch, 1976 is closer to the subfamily Monieziinae Spassky, 1951 than to Anoplocephalinae Blanchard, 1851. Moreover, RAUSCH (1976) placed the genus Aprostatandrya Kirschenblat, 1938 in the synonymy of the genus Paranoplocephala. This genus was included by SPASSKY (1951a) in the subfamily Monieziinae Spassky, 19 51 and was later divided by HUNKELER (1974) into two genera, Aprostatandrya (Kirschenblat, 1938) Spassky, 1951 and Sudarikovina (Spassky, 1951) Hunkeler, 1974. TENORA and MURAI (1980) accepted RAUSCH' s (1976) concept, but overestimating the criterion "uterus overlapping or not overlapping lateral excretory canals", they erroneously created a situation in which even the species Andrya c

unlculi (Blanchard, 1891) belonged to the genus Paranoplocephala. TENORA, VAUCHER and MURAI (1981-1982) studied the development of the uterus in the type species of Paranoplocephala and Andrya. They arrived at the conclusion that at the gravid stage, it is identical (reticular) in both type species and they considered the possible synonymy of the genera Paranoplocephala and Andrya. Also RAUSCH (1976), who studied both P. omphalodes and A. rhopalocephala, was not sure whether the genera Paranoplocephala and Andrya were bona genus (see RAUSCH, 1976, p. 521-523).