South African Crustacea. 35 



ance is very different from the corresponding appendage in P. regiiis 

 (Brito Capello) as figured by Dr. Nobili in the Mem. Soc. Espauola, 

 vol. L, pi. 8, fig. la, 1906. The epistome agrees with de Haan's 

 account in having three spines, with no intermediate spinules. 



The plate of the first antennae is armed with four large spaced 

 spines, within which are two that are much smaller. Four of these 

 intermediates are mentioned by de Haan, but only two are shown in 

 his figure. Both within and without the square there are some 

 insignificant spicules. The ornamentation of the carapace andpleon 

 agrees remarkably well with de Haan's description and figure. 

 The transverse furrows on the pleon are continuous and straight, 

 except the one on the sixth segment, which is lobed as in the figure. 



The first antennae are 155 mm. long. The carapace in the middle 

 line measures 52 mm., and the pleon 105 mm. 



Locality. Fishing ground, Algoa Bay. One specimen, a male. 



After the account of the specimen in spirit sent by Dr. Gilchrist 

 had long been written, a specimen from Port Elizabeth was for- 

 warded to me by Mr. FitzSimons. This example is considerably 

 larger, the carapace in the middle line measuring 67 mm. Being 

 dry, it had suffered considerably in transit. The appendages are so 

 brittle that they seem ready to break in pieces at a look, unless it is 

 a cautiously respectful one. From a comparison, however, of the 

 two specimens, I should now say that the exopod of the second 

 maxillipeds appears to have a short second joint in line with the 

 long first one. In the dry specimen the marginal spaces between 

 the three teeth of the epistome are denticulate, and in the other 

 specimen a little denticle can be felt rather than seen in each space. 

 On the plate of the first antennae the dry specimen has between its 

 four large spines five little ones. In general its ornamentation is 

 like that of the other example, and the sex is the same. 



TRIBE CAKIDEA. 



In regard to the species described and figured in part 3, p. 107, 

 pi. 24s, of this series, it is desirable here to notice that, as Mr. 

 Stanley W. Kemp has shown, in "Fisheries, Ireland Sci. Invest., 



1905, I. [1906]," the name Acantliephyra batei was preoccupied, and 

 further that the form is probably to be regarded only as one of the 

 many varieties or synonyms of Acanthephyra purpurea, A. Milne- 

 Edwards. Nobili, Bull. Sci. France-Belgique, vol. xl., extr. p. 22, 



1906, suggests that the species referred in pt. 3, p. 87, to Sergestcs 

 bisidcatus, Wood-Mason, belongs rather to S. prehensilis, Bate. 



