184 Amuds of the South African Museum. 



teeth on the telson : there are 3-4 teeth on each lobe instead of 2 as in 

 the other forms. 



Now specimens from Table Bay, which I have examined, agree with 

 the descriptions of Paramoera austrina but show according to age 

 from 2-8 apical teeth on the lobes of the telson ; in one large $ there 

 are even 11 teeth on each lobe. Chiltou does not give the length of 

 his specimens, but I cannot doubt that they are exactly similar to my 

 Table Bay specimens. 



Moreover, if the multidentate telson be compared with Bate's figure 

 of Ati/lits capensis (presumably copied from Dana) the conclusion is 

 unavoidable that we are dealing with the same form. In other respects 

 the specimens conform to Bate's (Dana's) somewhat meagre descrip- 

 tion. Differences in the relative lengths of upper and lower antennae 

 are unimportant. 



Stebbing's A. assimilis is a typical young specimen of P. capensis ; 

 the length of the ratni of 3rd uropod increase with age and become 

 more serrate. Similarly I think A. mageUanica is a young form of 

 this species. 



The question remains : Is P. austrina (Bate) and its synonyms as 

 given by Stebbing and Chilton (with the exception of A. assimilis) to 

 be included under P. capensis (Dana) ? Dana's name of course has 

 the priority. The series of Cape specimens shows that the number of 

 telsonic teeth increases with age from 2 to 8 (or even more) ; females 

 begin to bear ova when only 6 mm. long and when the telson has only 

 3 or 4 teeth. On the other hand, P. austrina (Bate), P. australis 

 Miers and Stebbingia gregaria. Pfeffer have all been described from 

 specimens about 17 mm. in length and still having only bidentate 

 telsonic lobes. 



This seems to me to warrant the separation, if not perhaps as a 

 species, then as a well-marked variety, of Bate's austrina from the 

 typical capensis of Dana. With austrina go the other synonyms as 

 suggested by Stebbing and Chilton, with the exception of Haswell's 

 megaloplitlialma. This I would separate as another variety charac- 

 terised by a strong rostrum (ff- length of 1st joint of 1st antenna), 

 and rounded, entire telsonic apices. 



Walker's P. magellanica (Nat. Antarct. Exp. vol. 3, p. 33, pi. 12, fig. 

 20, 1907) does not appear to be specifically the same, in my opinion. 



For the sake of comparison I give a detailed description of the Cape 

 specimens. 



Body smooth, pleon segments 1-3 not scabrous. Eostrum repre- 

 sented only by a small point. Eyes large, oval-oblong, nearly meeting 

 on the top of the head, larger in ? than <$ . Side-plates 1-4 rounded 



