PIIYU.OPOD CRUSTACEA 



37 



Tliis cliaracteristically Indian species has not been described nor figured except Ijy 

 Daday. The specimens tliat 1 have examined agree exactl}' on all important points with 

 Daday's description and, moreover, the specimens (except those collected by Professor 

 Hutchinson) are from the same region as Daday's, so that there can be no question of 

 subspecific or varietal differences. None the less, there are a considerable number of small 



Figure 4. — Pristket'halus prisms. A, right 2nd antenna of Sargodhar $ from above (X23). B, right Ist 

 maxilla of Theog $ (X 38, enlargement X 85). C, right 2nd maxilla of Kupri S, finer setae not shown (X64). 

 D, E, F, 1st, 6th, and 11th legs of Sargodhar S- Offset from D, flabelkim of same leg of Kupri S. Inset in F, 

 gill and epite of same leg of Theog $ (all X 22). 



points in which these specimens differ from Daday's description, and there are several charac- 

 ters which Daday seems entirely to have overlooked. His descriptions are in general unnec- 

 essarily detailed, and to correct all his observation it is needful for me to be very lengthy in 

 my description also. 



Male: Penultimate abdominal segtnent longer than any of the preceding 4. Last 

 abdominal segment (which is about half as long as the penultimate segment) sometimes 

 rather deeply notched between the cercopods. Cercopods long, narrow, ensiform; distal 

 end more or less acutely pointed; fringed all nmnd with moderately long plumose setae 

 (Figure 3, f). 



