492 PROCEEDm'GS OF THE OSTATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 91 



da Serra do Cubatao, between Santos and Sao Paulo, Brazil, April 

 26, 1935. 



Remarks. — Although this subspecies is decidedly similar to A. 

 odebrechtii Fritz Mliller, I do not have at hand enough well-developed 

 specimens to prove either their specific distinctness or identity. 

 Therefore the specimens I do have have been given subspecific 

 ranking. 



In relation to the eye, the rostrum of the species proper appears 

 a little longer; also it seems to be relatively a little more recurved 

 distally ; the rostrum is more nearly straight in the subspecies. The 

 orbits of the subspecies are definitely wider than in the species proper 

 and represent perhaps the most noticeable difference between the two 

 forms. Though not affording a very clear-cut difference, the an- 

 terolateral spines seem a little longer in the species proper, appearing 

 to reach a little past the posterior margin of the cornea, while in the 

 subspecies the anterolateral spine scarcely reaches the cornea. The 

 anterior margins of the protogastric lobes are definitely elevated in 

 the subspecies and the epigastric prominences, though low, are con- 

 spicuously tuberculif orm ; the reverse is true in the species proper 

 on both counts. 



Next to the orbits, the chelae of the two forms seem to be most 

 definitely different. In the subspecies they are relatively heavier, 

 stouter (chunkier, more swollen, or inflated), with appreciably 

 shorter, broader (stubbier) fixed fingers; the outer margin of the 

 palm of either hand has a comparatively greater convexity; while 

 the palmar crest is generally more (more or less) subparallel-sided 

 trough-shaped than impressed or excavate-subdisciform, and certainly 

 more definitely serrate in nearly every specimen of the subspecies 

 than in the species proper. 



Ordinarily, the female Aeglas do not exhibit the pronounced 

 asymmetry found in the male major and minor chelae, but in this 

 subspecies at least there is such asymmetry that at first glance the 

 two females with both chelae present (of the three females seen) 

 were taken to be males. 



It is possible that I have set up one form too many in naming 

 this subspecies. 



Distribution. — Other than the specimens from the type locality, I 

 have seen only a few small individuals, of which the largest was 

 about 15.5 mm. in length of carapace and rostrum together, which 

 may represent this subspecies, but I do not feel that I can make more 

 than tentative determinations of small specimens of forms as closely 

 related as the two here designated as A. odebrechtii and A. o. paul- 

 ensis. One lot of four small specimens received from Dr. Hermann 

 von Ihering a number of years ago is from the "Eio Juquery, Perus, 



