REPORT OF COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND FISHERIES. 129 



mens similar to this in the collection of the Peabody Academy of 

 Science, Salem, and two or three in the collection of the Boston 

 Society of Natural History" (p. 258). Herrick (Fig. 191) describes 

 another similar instance, and Bateson, in figm-e 186, No. 1, shows 

 an abnormality almost exactly parallel to om- specimen No. 1. 



There does not, however, seem to be a record of an extra process 

 on the toothed border of the dactyl as in specimen No. 2. The nearest 

 approach to it is that of Faxon (Plate I, Fig. 9), which has a double- 

 toothed process on the toothed border of the index, instead of upon 

 the dactyl. 



Specimen No. 3. (Fig. 3.) 



There seems to be no authentic record of a lobster claw similar to 

 this one. Faxon does, indeed, cite the case of two chelae on one of 

 the legs of a lobster (Plate II, Fig. 2), which Bateson was inclined to 

 regard as a case of a chela with an extra pair of dactyls and indices. 

 Faxon states: "This leg is provided with two chelae. One of them 

 has the ordinary form and structure, but is bent at a strong angle 

 with the long axis of the leg. The second claw appears to have 

 budded off from an amputated surface of the propodite. It consists 

 of two fingers, which have the form of the normal dactylus and index 

 but neither is articulated with the other at the base" (p. 261). 

 Bateson (p. 530) interpreted Faxon's extra ''dactylus and index" 

 as a "complementary pair of extra dactyls," and he thought it was 

 possible to bring this abnormal claw into the category of "two extra 

 dactyls and a double extra index" by interpreting a certain protub- 

 erance shown in Faxon's figure, as a double extra index. But it 

 seems that Bateson was here lead into an error, as the result of 

 inaccurate drawing; for Andrews ('05), referring to this same 

 specimen, states that he has been informed by Faxon that "the 

 artist unfortunately represented a protuberance which does not 

 exist" (p. 82). Consequently, this case of Faxon's must be excluded 

 from " the category of claws with two extra dactyls and a double 

 extra index." 



