1040 NOTES ON A FEW AUSTRALIAN EDRIOPHTHALMATA, 



Amphitiioe setosa. Haswell. 



Cat. Aust. Orast., p. 268; Proc. Linn. Soc, X. S. Wales, IV., 

 p. 270. 



A few specimens from Sydney Harbour. One, probably a male 

 specimen, agrees very closely witb the description given ; the 

 others, presumably females, differ in having the second gnathopoda 

 only as large as the first pair, which they closely resemble except 

 that the carpus is shorter, and they do not bear the long 

 slender hairs found in the male. Both male and female specimens 

 have a very short secondary appendage on the upper antenna. 



Microdeuteropus (1) Mortoni. Haswell. 



Cat, Aust. Crust, p. 264 ; Proc. Linn. Soc, N. S. Wales, IV., 

 p. 339, PL XXIL, fig. 2. 



I have a few specimens of this species from Sydney Harbour. 

 In his description of the anterior gnathopoda Mr. Haswell makes 

 no mention of the long hairs on the various joints. They are, I 

 think, of sufficient importance to be given in the specific descrip- 

 tion, and so far as my experience goes the general arrangement of 

 them is remarkably constant both in Microdeuteropus and many 

 other genera. In this species in the anterior gnathopoda the 

 basos has its anterior margin bordered with a fringe of long hairs, 

 there is a tuft at the antero-distal corner of the ischios, the meros 

 which is slightly hollowed anteriorly for the reception of the 

 carpus has both sides, except towards the end, fringed with long 

 hairs arranged more or less regularly in tufts, the carpus has then 

 on tho anterior margin, the propodos on both margins and the 

 dactylos three or four tufts of them on its concave border. The 

 hairs on the basos, ischios, meros and carpus are very delicate 

 and sparsely plumose towards the distal ends only, those on the 

 propodos and dactylos appear to be simple. 



Microdeuteropus tenuipes. Haswell. 



Cat. Aust. Crust., p. 264 ; Proc. Linn. Soc, N. S. Wales, IV., 



p. 339, PI. XXIL, fig. 1. 



(1). The Rev. T. K. It. Stebbing tells me by letter that " there seems to 

 lie a disposition to write Microdeuteropus instead of Microdeutopus on 

 philological grounds, regarding the latter as merely a casual mis-spelling.' 



