2 ALLAN HANCOCK PACIFIC EXPEDITIONS VOL.18 



known whether Holmes' material of "Byblis gaimardii" is the same as 

 this new species. Stout (1913) described the new species Ampelisca 

 articulata, which was referred to A. lobata Holmes by Shoemaker 

 (1941), with whom the writer agrees. Shoemaker (1916) described A. 

 venetiensis, a valid species; in 1942 he reported A. lobata from the Gala- 

 pagos Islands, and A. schellenbergi Shoemaker (1933) from Magdalena 

 Bay, Lower California, the first record of this Caribbean species from 

 the Pacific Coast of North America. 



Ampelisca eschrichtii Kr<£yer (1842) has been placed in the key to 

 the species of that genus because of Derjavin's (1930) record of it in 

 the Bering or Okhotsk Sea. It is probable that this species will be found 

 along the coast of Alaska. 



Most of the dredge hauls made by the Velero III and Velero IV 

 were in waters of less than 100 fms depth ; the relative absence of forms 

 lacking corneal lenses may be due to this fact, only a single blind species, 

 new to science, being taken (at a depth of 230 to 280 fms). Ampelisca 

 coeca Holmes and A. plumosa Holmes, both lacking corneal lenses, were 

 taken by the Albatross in 302 to 638 fms and 618 to 667 fms respec- 

 tively. The absence of forms of Ampelisca with the elongated third 

 article of peraeopod 5 is peculiar, only a single species, A. milleri, new 

 to science, being collected. The rather large number of new species of 

 Ampelisca has caused the writer concern over the use of specific criteria 

 in separating populations. However, each new species has been carefully 

 scrutinized and compared with the descriptions and figures of other 

 species in the literature. In the present collection, only two species, 

 A. macrocephala Lilljeborg (1852) and A. schellenbergi Shoemaker, are 

 known outside the Eastern Pacific region. As previously mentioned, one 

 other species, A. eschrichtii, has been recorded from this region and was 

 originally described from other areas. Because the writer has had con- 

 siderable difficulty in separating some of the new species described herein 

 from other species described since Stebbing's monograph (1906), a brief 

 discussion of the principal taxonomic features of the genus Ampelisca 

 has been included, to facilitate the work of other systematists in placing 

 some of the more poorly described species on a firmer foundation. 



