McIntosh, William Carmichael [as M'Intosh]. (1876). On British Annelida. Part I. Euphrosynidae, Amphinomidae, Aphroditidae, Polynoidae, Acoetidae, and Sigalionidae. Transactions of the Zoological Society of London. 9(7): 371-394, plates LXVII-LXX.
AnnelidaBase World Polychaeta Database (WPolyDb). The article was read 19 May, 1974, but at the bottom of p.371 the date of publication is given as January 1876 for vol 9 issue 7
[None. Begins:]
In the first of a series of papers on the British Marine Annelida, which I propose to offer to the Society, one or two reflections which have occurred during the study of the present forms may not be inappropriate, especially as they apply with equal force to the succeeding groups. Few students of the Annelida proceed far in their investigations before becoming aware that in many of the descriptions of their predecessors there is nothing decisive, and that they must wade through many superficial remarks without being able to lay hold of any stable character by which to extricate themselves from doubt. In some cases it would almost seem that the authors meant their successors to spend valuable time to little purpose in vainly endeavouring to find out the exact nature of the species, of which they themselves entertained only a hazy conception. It would appear in the majority of these instances that such inadequate and unsatisfactory descriptions have been due to the fact that the nice distinctions between closely allied forms have hitherto attracted little attention and less study. It is impossible, for example, to describe too minutely in groups like the Polynoide, in which the specific separation rests on so many fine characters. The mere statement that a bristle is slender and serrated conveys little more to the mind of an observer than the assertion, in comparing the hair of the bat with that of the sheep, that each is serrated. Even some of the most distinguished modern investigators of the Annelida have failed to appreciate the valuable results derived from a strict and faithful apprehension of the structure of the bristles, the other characters of course being duly attended to. If, instead of writing pages of weary Latin descriptions, a few terse sentences had been given, and a single characteristic bristle accurately figured by the author, very great labour and not a little doubt would have been saved to his successors.
