NO. 3594 SARSIELLA — KORNICKER 3 



bristles of the mandible, and the relative lengths of parts of the 

 mandible to shell length of tiie female S. capsula are compared to 

 females of other sarsiellids by Poulsen (1965, pp. 76, 147, table 4). 

 Although the relative lengths of claws, bristles, and joints of the man- 

 dible of S. capsula are somewhat different from other sarsiellids, the 

 value of these characters for distinguishing Sarsiella from other genera 

 is diminished because the variability of the measiu-ed characters 

 among females of Sarsiella is unkno^^^l. 



In his diagnosis of Sarsiella, Poulsen stated (1965, p. 76) that the 

 distal bidge of the ventral margin of the coxale of the mandible of the 

 female does not have a fringe of haii-s. This observation must have 

 been based on the description and illustration of the mandible of 

 S. capsula by Miiller (1894) because neither Norman (1869) nor 

 Brady and Norman (1896) described the coxale and the specimen of 

 S. capsula illustrated by Sars (1888, pi. X: fig. 4) has a fringe of hairs 

 along the ventral margin of the mandibidar coxale. I examined the 

 mandible of a specimen from the Gulf of Naples that had been iden- 

 tified by Miiller as S. capsula Norman and found that, contrary to 

 Miiller's description, the ventral margin of the mandibular coxale is 

 fringed with haii". Lack of haii's on the coxale would have been a 

 useful criterion for separating the female Sarsiella from Eusarsiella, 

 which does have hairs. 



I have been unable to find satisfactory morphological characters 

 for separating females of Sarsiella from Eusarsiella. Males of the 

 Sarsiellidae are relatively sparse compared to females and are un- 

 known for many species. I believe, therefore, that it is premature to 

 separate Eusarsiella from Sarsiella until it is possible to do so on the 

 basis of females or mitil males of more species become kno^vn. 



Only Miiller (1894) identified and described males of S. capsula. 

 It was, therefore, on the basis of Miiller's specimens that Poulsen 

 (1965) retained the generic name Sarsiella for species mth an un- 

 jointed bulge forming the endopodite of the male 2nd antenna and 

 referred to Eusarsiella the remaining species with a 3-jointed endopo- 

 dite. As discussed on page 33, Miiller erred in his identification of 

 S. capsula, and the endopodite of the male 2ud antenna of S. capsula 

 Norman is actuall}^ 3-jointed. According to this criterion, the tjrpe- 

 species of Sarsiella would belong in the genus Eusarsiella. Eusarsiella, 

 therefore, should be considered a synonym of Sarsiella. 



Sarsiella Norman, 1869 



Sarsiella Norman, 1869, p. 293. 



Nematohamrna Brady and Norman, 1896, p. 680. 



Eusarsiella Poulsen, 1965, p. 79. 



Type-species by monotypy: S. capsula Norman, 1869. 



Diagnosis. — Sarsiellid having furca without secondary claws and 



