252 



Page 129. Add the 3 following species: 



Eugerda globiceps, Meinert. 



(Suppl. PI. Ill, fig. 1). 

 Eugerda globiceps, Meinert, Crust, malacostraca, p. 194, PI. II, figs. 53 62. 



Specific Characters. Body of female resembling that of E. tenuimana, 

 but of considerably smaller size, and perhaps also somewhat less slender. Anterior 

 and posterior sections of mesosome of nearly equal length, and defined by a well- 

 marked constriction, the former somewhat broader than the latter; 1st segment 

 well developed, though considerably smaller than the 2 succeeding ones, 4th seg- 

 ment broader, but scarcely longer than the 1st, anterior corners of all 4 seg- 

 ments obtusely produced. 5th segment regularly quadrangular in outline, some- 

 what broader than it is long, and haying the lateral edges straight. Caudal seg- 

 ment rounded oval, without any lateral notches, tip narrowly rounded. Superior 

 antennae 5-articulate. Inferior antenna? less slender than in E. tenuimana, scarcely 

 exceeding l / s of the length of the body, flagellum shorter than the peduncle, 

 and composed of only 6 articulations. 1st pair of legs rather feeble, though not 

 nearly to such a degree as in E. tenuimana; the 3 succeeding pairs with a much 

 smaller number of spiniform bristles; the 3 posterior pairs likewise poorly provided 

 with setae, and scarcely at all adapted for swimming. Uropoda of almost exactly the 

 same structure as in E. tenuimana. Length of adult female scarcely exceeding 

 2*/2 mm. 



Remarks. This form is certainly very closely allied to E. tenuimana, 

 and I was thereby led to consider it as the very 'same species. Dr. Hansen however, 

 has found on a closer examination, that the Danish form in reality differs in some 

 points rather pronouncedly, and should thus more properly be regarded as speci- 

 fically distinct; and. in order that I might convince myself thereof, he has kindly 

 placed at my disposal the material upon which Prof. Meinert founded his species. 

 Indeed, the figures here given, which have been made from Danish specimens, leave 

 no doubt that Dr. Hansen is quite right in his supposition, and I am glad to be 

 able to give full evidence of the validity of Prof. Meinert's species. On the 

 other hand, Dr. Hansen is of opinion, that the genus Eugerda proposed by 

 Prof. Meinert is quite unmaintainable, and must be regarded as only a synonym 

 to Desmosoma of the present author. Indeed, the 2 new species described below 

 would seem to support such an opinion, since the feeble structure of the 1st pair 

 of legs cannot be regarded as a distinguishing character of that genus; but 

 there still remains a character, viz. the very obvious birarnous nature of the 



