Zoology.-] NATURAL HISTORY OF VICTORIA. \_Crustacea. 



snout to end of tail-flap, 1 ft. Proportional measurements to total length as 100: 

 Length of thorax from tip of rostrum, -^■^^■, length of abdomen to penultinaate joint 

 of abdomen, ^^^ ; greatest width of thorax behind middle, y%\ ; width of anterior 

 third, -i%V ; depth of thorax, -^^-^ ; greatest width of abdomen, y%% ; length of telson, 

 To^j greatest width of telson at anterior end, ■^^■, greatest width of telson near 

 posterior end, -^^^ ; length of first three joints of outer antennae, -1%"^ ; width of 

 ditto, xDiy; length of flagella of outer antennae, yV^ 5 length of rostrum, y-gj- ; length 

 of supra-orbital spines, y-^^; length of first joint of inner antennae, y W ; second 

 joint, yf ^ ; third joint, yj^ ; flagella, y^^^^^j ; length of first pair of legs, ^^j^ ; second 

 pair, iVjr ; third pair, yVij ; fourth pair, y-*|j\ ; fifth pair, -^^ ; greatest width of first 

 leg- (behind middle of penultimate joint), y^^y. 



Reference. — Heller, Sitzungsbericht der Wiener Akad. der Wissenschaften, 

 V. 45, p. 393, and Reise der Novara Crust., p. 96, t. viii. ; ? = P. tumidus (Kirk), 

 Tr. N.Z. S., V. xii., p. 314. 



This species, which is the Common Sydney Craw-fish, is easily 

 distinguished fi-om the southern one, the P. Lalandi* which is the 

 Common Melbourne Craw-fish, by its nearly smooth abdomen, 

 larger rostrum, smaller anterior legs, and different colors. It has 

 not been figured of the colors of life before. It is so rare south of 

 N. S. Wales that I have only seen one (now in the Museum and 

 figui'ed on our plate), and heard of another, caught on the Victorian 

 coast, near Port Phillip Heads ; and I have a single specimen from 

 Tasmania, where, as in Victoria, the P. Lalandi abounds, whUe 

 this is extremely rare. I have little doubt the gigantic specimen 

 described by Mr. Kirk, from the west coast of the North Island of 

 New Zealand, under the name P. tumidus.^ is only a very old and 

 full-grown example of the same species, the size being double that 



•Note. — Since the publication of the figures and description of P. Lalandi in our Decade XV., I have received 

 several speciuieus from the Cape of Good Hope through the kindness of Mr. Trinien, of the South African Museum, 

 Cape Town, fully bearing out the remarks I have made as to the identity of our Melbourne Craw-flsh and the S. African 

 one. Some of tlie specimens are very old and large, equalling our largest e.KampIes, and in these there is great 

 Irregularity in the tumidity of the branchial regions and consequent width of middle of carapace: the most extreme 

 case of this was owing to a diseased condition due to the growth of multitudes of Mussel shells {MijlUus) on the gills. 

 The healtliy ones had the same proportion as I have figured for our common Melbourne species, which also varies In 

 this respect. I should have dj'awn attention to the fact that, although in most specimens the color of the abdomen ia 

 almost uniform, yet in many examples there are whitish, irregular, dendritic, oblique markings on the lateral portions 

 of each segment, and five, diverging, longitudinal ones on tail-flaps. These are rather more distinct on the Cape 

 specimens ; but perfectly idendicai markings are to be found on many of the Melbourne ones, as well as occasional 

 whitish rings on the antenute, irregularly varying in position and width. 



Since the foregoing portion of this note was in type, I have received a copy from my friend, Professor Parker, of 

 his paper from the Transactions of the N.Z. Institute, Vol. XIX., on the identity of the specimens referred to P. Lalandi 

 from New Zeabuul by Hutton, and by Miers, with those referred by the saniQ authors to Hutton's second species 

 (/•. Eilieardsi) from the same locality, and it is satisfactory to find that we have Independently made nearly similar 

 observations. Professor Parker, having also got specimens from the Cape of Good Hope of the true P. Lalandi, thinks 

 he llnds a cliaracter to distinguish them from our Southern Australasian species, to which he provisionally continues 

 the name /*. Ediriirdsi. This is a couple of rows of tubercles on the anterior portion of the first abdominal segment, in 

 front of the transverse furrow. I have never seen this extraordinary character in our Victorian specimens; but, on the 

 otlii-r band, one of our Cape specimens is almosl without litem, and Protessor Parker notes one or two tubercles in this position 

 in one of his New Zealand specimens. So, clearly, this character cannot separate the species. The second difference 

 relied on by Professor Parker is the third abdominal segment having only one row of tubercles behind the transverse 

 groove. In the New Zealand specimens, but two or three rows in his Cape ones. One of my Cape specimens fias only 

 one row, as In our ordinary Uobson's Bay examples, and I find our species occasionally exhibiting as many rows of 

 tubercles in f^out of the groove as the Cape ones, 



[ 222 ] 



