AMI'IlII'onV 235 



DESCRIPTION OF THE SPECIES. 



The following terms arc used in the description: 



"Pleon" = Metasome, G. ( >. Sars; the first 3 abdominal segments. 



" Urus" = Urosome, G. 0. 8. ; the last 3 abdominal segments. 



" < >cular lobe" = Lateral angle of the head. 



"Appendage" = Secondary or accessory appendage of the upper antenna?. 



In the peduncle of the antennae the " first joint " is the ante-penultimate ; in the 

 limbs it is the basipodite, the propodos, or hand, thus being the 5th joint. 



The measurements are from the tip of the uropods to the base of the antenna? when 

 the Amphipod is laid straight. 



\\ hen a joint is said to be as long as two or more it means as long as those joints 

 united. 



In the following classification the system used by Professor G. O. Sars in his 

 'Amphipoda of Norway' has been followed, except as to the position of the genus 

 Leucothoe. 



Tribe: IIYPERIIDEA. 



Family: HYPEEIIDiE. 



Hyperia, Latreille, 1825. 

 Hyperia galba (Mont.). 



Two from the Ileef, Galle, the largest 7 '5 millims. 



The serration of the hind margin of the 1st gnathopod is simple, as figured by 

 Bovallius for II. gaudichaudi, M. Edw. (Hyperidea, Plate X., fig. 20). If 

 H. latreillei, M. Edw., is to be united to II. (/alba, as proposed by Sars ('Amph. of 

 Norway,' p. 7), there seems to be no reason why //. gaudichaudi, which Bovallius 

 (lor. cit., p. 17G) considers "a link between" these 2 species, should not also be 

 included. The shape of the gnathopods in the present specimens is nearer to 

 77. galba than to II. gaudichaudi as figured b}' Bovallius. 



Hyperia bengalensis (Giles). 



Lestrigonus bengalensis, Gii.es, ' Journ. of Asiatic Soc. of Bengal,' 1887, p. 224. 

 Hyperia dysschistus, Stebbing, ' " Chall." Amph.,' p. 13S8, Plate 1G7, 1888. 

 There can be little doubt of the identity of the above; Stebbing, with his usual 

 acuteness, observed the similarity, but was misled partly by the distance between the 

 two stations (//. dysschistus was taken off (ape Howe, Australia) and partly by errors 

 in Giles' description of the telson and uropods. As suggested by Bovallius (loc. 

 <!(.. p. 200), Gills has mistaken the projecting hind margin of the urosome for the 



2 ii 2 



