CRUSTACEA MALACOSTRACA. IV. 39 



Uropods (fig. 2 i) slender and very long ; the peduncle is fully as long as the three posterior abdominal segments 

 combined, almost two and a half times as long as the endopod, with about 4 thin spines on the distal part 

 of the inner margin; the endopod with 10 spines on the inner margin, a very long terminal spine, and all 

 spines pectinate on both margins; the exopod is very little shorter than the endopod. 



Length of females with marsupium 4.3 — 4.7 mm. 



Male. The carapace differs in the usual way from that of the female; its anterior part seen from 

 above is shown in fig. 2 k; the antennal notch is distinct, but its margin only very moderately concave; 

 the shining, polished surface is characteristic. Uropods (fig. 2 1) still longer than in the female; the peduncle 

 varies from being a little more to a little less as long as half of the third abdominal segment and the three 

 posterior segments combined, not fully two and a half times as long as the endopod, with about 12 setiform 

 spines along the inner margin; the endopod nearly as in the female, with about 12 thin spines on the inner 

 margin, not counting the very long terminal spine; the exopod somewhat shorter than the endopod. 



Length 5.1 mm. 



Remarks. Many years ago I had determined this species as C. nitens Bonnier, established on an 

 immature male scarcely 5 mm. long, but a closer examination revealed such differences in three of the append- 

 ages that my form must be considered a different species. Bonnier says that the inner margin of third to 

 sixth joint of third maxillipeds is "regulierementdenticule", and this statement agrees with his fig. 4 m (PI. 28), 

 but in my animals the large fourth joint has no vestige of such serration, third joint only the terminal tooth, 

 and furthermore instead of the big tooth on the distal outer angle of the merus his figure seems to exhibit 

 three small teeth on the outer margin. Though in other species of Campylaspis I have found some individual 

 variation as to serration on the limbs, the differences in this respect between Bonnier's description and my 

 animals are far too great to be considered as due to variation. His figure of second pair of legs has the carpus 

 considerably shorter and thicker than in ray animals, and he describes and figures the dactylus as "elargi", 

 while in my specimens it is slender. Finally his description and figure of the uropods differ very much from 

 my animals; according to Bonnier the inner margin of the peduncle is finely serrated, but such serration is 

 not found either in the male or the female; furthermore he figures 5 or 6 spines on the inner margin of the 

 endopod. while my specimens have a much higher number. Besides some further differences between C. ni- 

 tens Bonn, and C. alba can be found by a comparison of the figures. While C. nitens Bonn, must be another 

 species than mv animals, I am convinced that the immature females taken west of Ireland and referred 

 by Caiman with a query to Bonnier's form in reality belong to C. alba, as his notes, pointing out differences 

 between his specimens and C. nitens, show agreement with my form. — C. pulehclla G. O. Sars is also similar 

 in general aspect to C. alba, but differs sharply in the spinulation of the uropods, while second and third 

 pairs of maxillipeds in C. pulchella are unknown. 



Occurrence. Not taken by the "Ingolf" but by the "Thor" at two localities. 



South-West of the Faeroes: Lat. 6i°i5' N., Long. o.°35' W., 463— 515 fath. ; 10 females, 1 male. 

 — Lat. 6i°07' N., Long. 9°3o' W., 443 fath. ; 24 specimens, 2 and o- 



Distribution. According to the "Remarks" gathered west of Ireland, 312 fath. (Caiman). 



