1642 THE VOYAGE OF H.M.S. CHALLENGER. 



flagellum to the upper antennae, and M. Chevreux says that he has always found one in 

 the different forms of the genus Podoceropsis which he has had occasion to examine ; on 

 this subject I may refer to what is said on p. 1108, in confirmation of M. Chevreux's 

 remark. 

 Lists are given of the species of Amphipods obtained at various stations off the west coasts of 

 France and Spain, and among others M. Chevreux notices that " Melita gladiosa Sp. Bate " 

 and " Gammaropsis erythrophthalma Lillj." were obtained from a depth of 250 metres. 



1887. Giles, G. M. 



On Six new Amphipods from the Bay of Bengal. Natural History Notes from 

 H.M.'s Indian Marine Survey Steamer "Investigator." No. 6. [Reprinted from 

 the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. LVI. Part II. No. 2, 1887.] 

 [Received and Read March 2nd, 1887.] pp. 212-229. Plates III.-VIII. 



The first section of the paper is headed, "A Description of two new Species of the Amphipod 

 Family Phronimidae with some Bernards on the Genera of the Family." In stating that the 

 finger of the third peraeopod in Phronima is not, as Spence Bate supposed, either fused 

 with the preceding joint or obsolete, Mr. Giles is, I think, quite right. He describes and 

 figures (pi. iii. figs. 1 and 2), a new species, Phronima bucephala, which, he says, " differs 

 from the genus as defined by Claus in the following points : — 1st., in my one female 

 specimen, I can make out no trace whatever of inferior antennae ; 2nd., the subchela of the 

 ' 5th ' (6th) thoracic appendage [third peraeopod] cannot be said to be slender, the fixed 

 ramus being very stout and almost quadrate ; 3rd., there are two extra small gill-sacs on the 

 2nd and 3rd thoracic segments, a character extremely abnormal, but of the reality of which 

 I carefully satisfied myself. To avoid, however, the necessity of manufacturing a new 

 genus, I describe it as a member of the genus Phronima, as defined by Spence Bate, under 

 the name of P. bucephala." 



There is certainly no need for a new genus ; the specimen is a small one, " 5 - 75 mm." in total 

 length, so that the failure to discover the lower antennae can be easily understood ; the 

 objection that the grasping part of the third peneopods cannot be said to be slender rests on 

 an accidental misreading of Claus' generic definition, which states that this part is powerful 

 (mit machtiger Scheerenhand), not slender (schmachtig in the previous line referring to the 

 gnathopods) ; lastly, the two extra pairs of gill-sacs are probably not gill-sacs but marsupial 

 plates in process of development, at least I have never met with them except in small 

 specimens of Phronima. The telson in this genus is as a rule so difficult to observe, that 

 too much stress must not be laid on the remark in the specific description, " the telson 

 appears obsolete." The fourth joint of the third peraeopod is thus described — " The carpo- 

 podite is triangular, its inferior border being nearly as long as the lateral. The antero- 

 inferior angle is prolonged into a powerful spine, and the inferior border is armed with three 

 dentations, between which are a corresponding number of small, isolated tufts of hair." 

 According to the figure, however, the anteroinferior spine is not very strong compared with 

 what is found in adult specimens of the female in this genus. In the " Explanation of the 

 Plates " the specimen by a misprint is said to be a male. 



The second species described and figured (pi. iii. fig. 3) is named Phrnnimclla kippocephala, 

 n. sp., which appears from the antennae to be a young male, but whether it is distinct from 

 species already described it may be difficult to decide. The first peraeopods are as usual 

 much longer than the second, and this peculiarity made Mr. Giles hesitate whether he could 

 include his species in the genus Phronimella. Claus, unfortunately, in Der Organismus der 



