I 

 6 Transactions. 



» 



As I have previously suggested (1909, p. 621), the small side lobes at the 

 end of the second basal joint of the upper antenna, which were first noticed 

 bv Walker, appear to be for the support of the rest of the antenna, allowing 

 it to move freely in a vertical plane but not from side to side. In a 

 similar way there is a slight hollow or depression on the upper surface 

 of the inner branch of uropod 3 formed on the outer side of the ridge 

 mentioned above, and into this the outer branch fits closely when it is 

 not in use (see fig. 5). Analogous structures will probably be found in other 

 Amphipoda of similar habits. 



Ampelisca eschrichtii (Kroyer). 



Ampelisca eschrichtii Chilton, 1917, p. 75. 



In the Index Faunae Zealandiae two species of Afupelisca are put 

 down as found in New Zealand, A. chiltoni and A. acinaces, both described 

 by Stebbing in the report on the " Challenger " Amphipoda. In the paper 

 quoted above I attempt to show that these are only forms, of the species 

 long known in Arctic seas as A. eschrichtii Kroyer, and that A. macrocephala 

 Liljeborg should also be' considered as belonging to this species. The 

 species is widely distributed both in Arctic and in Antarctic seas, where 

 it may attain a length of 34 mm. In intermediate seas it is represented 

 by forms of smaller size^ in which the distinctive characters of the species 

 are less evident. 



Urothoides lachneessa (Stebbing). 



Urothoe lachneessa Stebbing, 1888, p. 825, pi. 57. Urothoides lach- 

 neessa Stebbing, 1906, p. 132. 



This species was described from specimens obtained from Kerguelen 

 Island by the "Challenger "' Expedition. I have a specimen, washed on to 

 the shore of Stewart Island and sent to me by Mr. Walter Traill, that I 

 feel confident belongs to the same species. The specimen had been dried 

 and somewhat shrivelled, but by mounting it in dissected form sufficient 

 of the appendages can be made out to render the identification pretty 

 certain. The first and second gnathopods, agree closely with Stebbing's 

 figure except that in the first the propod is narrower. The first, second, 

 and third peraeopods are also closely similar. The fourth and fifth cannot 

 be distinctly made out, but appear to agree except in having fewer setae. 

 One of the uropods also can be seen to agree with Stebbing's figure. 



This appears to be the first specimen that has been seen since the 

 original ones were taken by the "Challenger."' 



Parapherusa crassipes (Haswell). 



Harmonia crassipes Haswell, 1879, ]). 330, pi. 19, fig. 3. Parapherusa 



crassipes Stebbing, 1906, p. 383 ; Chilton, 1916, p. 199, pis. 8-10. 



This is a species widely distributed in Australia and New Zealand, and 



for some time there was an uncertainty as to its systematic position. It 



seems, however, rightly placed under the genus Parapherusa in the family 



Gammaridae, to which it was assigned by Stebbing. A full account of its 



external structure and of the marked sexual dift'erences is given in the last 



of the references quoted above. 



Eurystheus haswelli (G. M. Thomson). 



Maera haswelli G. M. Thomson, 1897, p. 449, pi. 10, figs. 6-10. 



Wyvillea haswelli Stebbing, 1899, p. 350, and 1906, p. 648. 



In Mr. Thomson's collection are two im])erfect specimens labelled 



" Maera haswelli G. M. T., Bay of Islands, 8 fathoms," which are y^resum- 



ably co-types of his species. These are identical with specimens from 



