572 THE VOYAGE OF H.M.S. CHALLENGED. 



Tribe 4. Hyperiiua. Earn. Hyperiidte. Gen. Hyperiopsig, n. " Generic Character. — Body of 

 the usual form in Hyperidians, tumid anteriorly, with back broad and small epimera. 

 Head large, with upper part prominently arcuate. Eyes incompletely developed. First pair 

 of antenna} larger than 2nd, with peduncle short and a well-developed accessory flagellum. 

 Mandibles furnished with distinctly developed palps. The 2 foremost pairs of legs 

 feeble in structure, simple, non-subcheliform ; the 2 succeeding pairs with 3rd joint very 

 large, compressed, lamelliform ; the 3 posterior pairs slender, almost filiform, with basal 

 joint but slightly expanded ; last joint longest. Pleopods powerfully developed. The 2 

 foremost pairs of caudal stylets simple, two-jointed ; last pair biramous. Telson rudi- 

 mentary." " It is far from improbable that a closer examination will show the necessity of 

 selecting it [Hyperiopsis V0ringii] as the type of a distinct group within the tribe Hyperiina. 

 The most striking peculiarity in the present form is the distinct and rather large secondary 

 flagellum on the 1st pair of antennae, a character quite aUeu to Hyperidians in general." 

 75. " Hyperiopsis Vi^ringii," n. sp. " The specimen examined would appear, judging from 

 the structure of the antennae, to be a female," length 11 mm., taken ofl' the Norwegian coast 

 at a depth of 600 fathoms. [The fifth and sixth pleon-segments are not coalesced.] 



In the Oversigt af Norges Crustaceer, 1882, Sars divides the Amphipoda into Tribe 1. 

 Hyperina, Tribe 2. Gammarina, Tribe 3. Caprellina. In the the present work we find 

 Tribe 3. Caprellina, but Tribe 1. Gammarina, and Tribe 4. Hyperiina, without any Tribe 2. 

 It may be presumed that the change of order was intentional, and that the numbers would 

 have been consecutive but for an oversight. 



The appendix, p. 276, mentions that Socarnes oralis, Hoek, is a synonym of Socames bidenticulatus 

 (Sp. Bate), and that in regard to the shallow-water specimen from north of Spitzbergen 

 referred by Hoek to Onesimus leucojns, G. 0. Sars, the correctness of the determination is 

 very questionable. 



1885. Schneider, J. Sparre. 



Pontocrates norvegicus, Boeck, und Dexamine thea, Boeck, Ein Beitrag zur 

 Kenntuiss der Amphipoden des arktischen Norwegens. Tromso. Mit 2 Tafeln. 

 pp. 13-26. 



Pontocrates norvegicus, Boeck, is described and figured in much detail, distinguished from 

 Pontocrates (Kroyera) arenarius, Sp. Bate, and identified with Kroyera aJtamarina, Bate 

 and Westwood. The genus Pontocrates, as defined by Boeck, is considered to be scarcely if 

 at all distinguishable from Monoculodes. A very striking relationship is pointed out 

 between Monoculodes carinatus, Sp. Bate, and Pontocrates norvegicus. Since Monoculodes 

 carinatus was originally instituted as the type-species of Krikjera, Sp. Bate, Schneider's 

 investigations seem to tend either to the restoration of the name Kroyera, with the species 

 carinata, arenaria and norvegica, or to the merging of Kroyera and Pontoeintes alike in. 

 Monoculodes. [The form Kroyera, instead of the earlier and more correct Kroyera, is 

 uniformly used in the British vSessile-eyed Crustacea.] 



Dexamine thea, Boeck, is fully described and figured. On the first maxillae Schneider observes, 

 " A want of symmetry in the mouth-organs is found in most Amphipoda, especially in the 

 mandibles, but so irregular a pair of first maxillas I have hithel'to found only in Dexamine." 

 It is apparently very like Dexamine heihergi, Boeck. " In regard to the telson, Boeck 

 speaks of it as split to the root; I remarked to be sure," Schneider says, "a suture along 

 the whole telson, but even under strong pressure could only make the points dehiscent. 

 The third segment of the pleon is, just as in many Lysianassidc-e, drawn out into a pointed, 

 somewhat upward curved, hook, whereas Boeck expressly affirms the contrary." 



