CLASSIFICATION 19 



St. MS 67. 28. ii. 26. East Cumberland Bay, South Georgia. BTS. 38 m. : Cheirimedon fcmoratus 

 (Pfr.); Gitanopsis antarctica, Chevr. ; Metopoides parallelocheir (Stebb.); Thaumatelson nasutum, 

 Chevr. ; T. cultricauda, n.sp. ; Monoculodes scabriculosus, n.sp. ; Oediceroides calmani, Wlkr.; 

 Oradarea bidentata, n.sp.; Pontogeneiella longicornis (Chevr.); Prostebbingia gracilis (Chevr.); 

 Djerboa furcipes, Chevr. ; Schraderia gracilis, Pfr. 



St. MS 68. 2. iii. 26. East Cumberland Bay, South Georgia. [N 200. 200-0 m. sic on label.] 

 Orchomenella rossi (Wlkr.). NRL and NCS. 220-247 m. : Orchomenella macronyx, Chevr. ; Para- 

 perioculodes brevimanus, Brnrd. ; Oradarea tridentata, n.sp. 



St. MS 71. 9. iii. 26. East Cumberland Bay, South Georgia. BTS and NCS-T. 110-60 m. : 

 Aristias antarcticus, Wlkr.; Leucothoe spinicarpa (Abildg.) ; Iphimediellamargueritei, Chevr.; Gnathi- 

 phimedia mandibular is, Brnrd.; Echiniphimedia hodgsoni (Wlkr.); Halice profundi, n.sp.; Monoculodes 

 scabriculosus, n.sp.; Oediceroides calmani, Wlkr.; Oradarea bidentata, n.sp.; Epimeria puncticulata, 

 Brnrd.; Par epimeria crenulata, Chevr.; Eusiroides georgianus, n.sp.; Prostebbingia gracilis (Chevr.); 

 Djerboa furcipes, Chevr.; Polycheria antarctica (Stebb.); Cerapus oppositus, n.sp. 



St. MS 74. 17. iii. 26. East Cumberland Bay, South Georgia. NCS and BTS. 22-40 m. : Thauma- 

 telson nasutum, Chevr.; Monoculodes scabriculosus, n.sp.; Oradarea tridentata, n.sp.; O. bidentata, 

 n.sp.; Prostebbingia gracilis (Chevr.); Djerboa furcipes, Chevr.; Paradexatnine fissicauda, Chevr. 



St. MS 82. 6. ix. 26. Off Salamander Point, Saldanha Bay, South Africa. BTS. 4 fms. (7-14 m.) : 

 Iphimedia capicola, n.sp.; Panoploea excisa, n.sp.; Paramoera capensis (Dana). 



Examples of Cyamidae were collected at South Georgia, South Shetlands, Saldanha 

 Bay, Durban, and at 14 45' N, 18 24' W. 



GENERAL REMARKS AND OBSERVATIONS 



CLASSIFICATION 



It is not always easy to steer a middle course between "lumping" and "splitting". 

 In many modern works a noticeable tendency towards the latter is present, and there is 

 much to be said in its favour. In cases where abundant material in all stages of growth 

 can be obtained from well-explored areas like the European seas, it is often possible to 

 establish an acceptable synonymy. But in a vast region like the southern hemisphere, 

 where extremely little detailed exploration has been carried out, and we are only just 

 starting to acquire a knowledge of the fauna, much greater caution is necessary. As a 

 result of the study of the Discovery collection, it has been borne in upon me, to my 

 great regret, that much of the work of the late Dr Chilton was marred by too premature 

 an insistence on the "variability" and "wide distribution" of certain species in the 

 Antarctic and sub-Antarctic seas. 



Variation should not be invoked to account for slight differences between forms from 

 different regions. It should be determined on a large number of individuals from one 

 locality or contiguous areas (e.g. Echiniphimedia echinata). And when determined in 

 one form it should not be attributed by analogy, or only with the greatest caution, to 

 another allied species or, a fortiori, genus. 



The recognition of this principle and the desire to avoid an increase in the number 

 of "species " seem to be responsible for the tendency to adopt a trinomial nomenclature. 

 It is questionable whether it is not more convenient, as often as not, to regard every 



3-2 



