10 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 119 



longulus and C. I. chasmodadylus. The setaceous tuft at the base of 

 the immovable finger of the chela may be present or absent but, as 

 in C. I. longulus, it seems to be consistent within a population; older, 

 late intermolt animals do not seem to lose the tuft of setae as readily 

 as do those of C. I. longulus or C. I. chasmodadylus. Most C. longulus 

 longirostris are larger than C. I. longulus and smaller than C. I. chas- 

 modadylus. The largest, a first-form male, has a carapace that 

 measures 43 mm. in length and a chela, 56 mm. long. Both color 

 and color pattern vary in different parts of the range; figures 2a,b 

 illustrate two of the pattern variations. Neither C. I. longulus nor 

 C. I. chasmodadylus possesses the vivid saddle pattern seen in so many 

 C. longulus longirostris populations, particularly those orange-colored 

 animals from Lawrence County and the less colorful individuals from 

 the Hiwassee drainage, Tennessee. Most C. longulus longirostris are 

 a blue green or brown not unlike the concolorous C. I. longulus. 



There are so many variations in this crayfish that, beyond the 

 presence of the suborbital angle, no characteristic has been observed 

 that will serve to distinguish C. longulus longirostris from the other 

 subspecies. 



Specimens examined. — I have examined approximately 500 speci- 

 mens from 113 collections taken from 97 locahties in Alabama, 

 Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. Many of these 

 collections contain both sexes and both forms of the male. 



Geographic distribution. — Camharus longulus longirostris is 

 confined to tributaries of the Tennessee and Coosa Rivers. Reports 

 from the Clinch River, "West Virginia" are erroneous; the Chnch 

 River, Tennessee drainage, does not extend into West Virginia; one 

 need only note this location to know that Faxon erred and probably 

 meant Chnch River in western Virginia. The northern Hmit appears 

 to be in the upper Chnch (map 2, no. 202), Tazewell County, Va.; 

 its southernmost boundary is Will's Creek (Coosa drainage) (map 1, 

 no. 96), DeKalb County, Ala. Having recorded five collections 

 from Will's Creek in DeKalb County, I beheve it is highly probable 

 that this is the locaUty meant by Faxon (1898, p. 649), not "Will's 

 Creek, Pollard, Escambia Co. [itahcs mine], Alabama." I have no 

 knowledge of a Will's Creek in Escambia County. Ortmann (1931, 

 p. 123), assuming that the county listed by Faxon was correct, notes 

 this record as being "extremely doubtful" giving instead as the south- 

 ernmost locaMty, Catoosa County, Ga. (Tennessee River drainage). 

 Two collections from Lawi'ence County, (map 1, nos. 209, 210) and 

 one from Lauderdale County, Ala. (map 1, no. 98) mark the western- 

 most hmit of the range. Although many collections have been made 

 both east and west of the southwestern locahties, no C. longulus 

 longirostris has been found closer than those collected from Marion 



