though in some respects it certainly exhibits an apparent resemblance both to the 

 Calanoida and to the Cyclopoida. That at any rate the typical genus Misophria 

 cannot be referred to the former group, has been clearly shown by Dr. Giesbrecht; 

 and he also finds it impossible to class it among the Cydopoida, because the 

 posterior antennae have a well-developed outer ramus, wholly absent in all known 

 forms of that group. So far I fully agree with that author; but, on the other 

 hand, I cannot concur in his opinion that the difficulties in referring this form 

 to the Harpacticoida are equally great. True, the anterior antennae look rather 

 different from their comparatively greater length and more numerous articu- 

 lations; but this character is evidently of far less importance than those referred 

 to as distinguishing the genus from the Calanoida and Cyclopoida. There is an- 

 other character, to which Dr. Giesbrecht has called attention, and which, indeed, 

 seems to be of much greater importance, viz., the presence in Misophria of a 

 distinct, though rather small and imperfectly developed heart. Such an organ, 

 as is well known, is wholly absent in both the Cyclopoida and the Harpacticoida, 

 whereas in the Calanoida it is always present. As, however, several other impor- 

 tant features (for instance, the mode of articulation of the last segment of the 

 metasome, and the symmetrical structure of the male genital apparatus) make it 

 quite unreasonable to place the genus in that group, we must set aside this 

 peculiarity, and otherwise decide to which of the 2 groups, Cyclopolda, or Har- 

 pacticoida, it should rightly be referred. For my own part, I consider a character, 

 not found out by Dr. Giesbrecht, to be quite conclusive, viz. the presence in 

 Misophria of only a single ventral ovisac. 



In addition to the typical genus, Prof. Brady refers 2 other genera to 

 the family Misophriidce, viz., Pseudocyclops and Cervinia, and to the same family 

 Mr. Th. Scott subsequently referred another genus, Paramisophria. All these 3 

 genera must, however, be discarded from the present family, 2 of them, Pseudo- 

 cyclops and Paramisophria being, as shown by Dr. Giesbrecht, true Calanoids, 

 whereas the 3rd belongs to a very different family of the Harpadicoida, viz., 

 Cerviniidce, to be treated of below. Of course the present family as yet com- 

 prises only a single genus. 



Gen. 1. MiSOphria, Boeck, 1864. 



Generic Characters. Body comparatively robust, sub-depressed, with the 

 anterior division considerably expanded. Cephalosome wholly confluent with the 



