HYPERIIDEA 249 



dentate, secondary cutting plate in both mandibles, spine row of three to four very short 

 setules, molar tuberculiform, palp with 3rd joint nearly as long as 2nd. Maxilla 1, inner 

 lobe rather long but narrow, setose along whole inner margin, outer lobe obliquely 

 truncate, palp strong, ovate, obscurely 2-jointed, apically setose. (The figure shows 

 the appendage flattened out ; normally the plane of the palp is at right angles to that of 

 the outer lobe.) Maxilla 2, both lobes apically rounded, subequal, inner lobe with 

 oblique row of setae as well as marginal row. Maxilliped, outer plate not greatly larger 

 than inner plate, both with plumose setae, palp slender, 4-jointed, 1st joint shorter than 

 either 2nd or 3rd. 



Gnathopod 1, 2nd joint stout, 4th and 5th short, triangular, 6th subequal to 2nd, 

 nearly cylindrical, tapering slightly distally, chelate, finger matching thumb. Gnathopod 

 2 similar to gnathopod 1, but rather more slender, 3rd and 5th joints longer. 



Peraeopods 1-5, stout, alike, though 2nd joint in peraeopod 5 is wider proximally, 

 4th joint scarcely produced apically. 



Uropods 1 and 2 stout, outer rami slightly shorter than inner rami, margins with 

 a few stout spinules. Uropod 3 rudimentary, consisting of a short ovate peduncle 

 only. 



HYPERIIDEA 



In 1909 Woltereck on the basis of his studies of material from various deep-sea 

 expeditions introduced a new classification of certain groups of the Hyperiid Amphi- 

 pods. These studies were admittedly preliminary, but up to the present no fuller in- 

 vestigations have been published. In 1929 Pirlot made some criticisms of Woltereck's 

 views and suggested a different arrangement. The two schemes may be set out side by 

 side to show their respective points of difference and agreement (see p. 480). 



In the Terra Nova Report (1930) I pointed out that the name "Pygmaeidae" was 

 inadmissible and suggested the name Archaeoscinidae, having overlooked the fact that 

 Stebbing had already foreseen the possibility of its being introduced later. 



Pirlot makes Archoeoscina, the type of the family Archaeoscinidae, separate from the 

 other genera of Woltereck. For these latter he uses the inadmissible name " Pyg- 

 maeidae'", though suggesting that the family name ought more properly to be Micro- 

 mimonectidae. 



It is obvious that if we separate Archoeoscina, each of the other genera is worthy of 

 its own family. For the present we know far too little about these curious forms to 

 make it worth while increasing family names. I am, however, following Pirlot in 

 separating the Archaeoscinidae, and I adopt the name Micromimonectidae after the 

 earliest of the three remaining genera. 



Such terms as "Primitiva", " Recticornia", etc., are not employed here as it is not 

 the purpose of this report to discuss the major aspects of the classification of the 

 Hyperiid Amphipods. 



DV 32 



