24 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM vol. 121 



Female. — A full description of this species will not be given here 

 since it has been well described recently by Ho (1960). Body form 

 as in figure 119. Total length 9.8 mm (based on an average of 3 

 specimens). Greatest width 4.9 mm (measured at the widest part of 

 the cephalon). Cephalon somewhat truncated but not as narrowed 

 anteriorly as P. niger. First thoracic segment fused with head. 

 Dorsal thoracic plates on segments 2-4 with plates of segments 2 and 

 3 fused basally, posterior borders forming a straight line as in P. 

 bicolor and P. niger. Some of the salient featm-es have been figured 

 for the sake of comparison. Caudal rami (fig. 120) intermediate 

 between that of P. bicolor and P. niger, measurmg 1.26 mm in length 

 and extending posteriorly only about as far as the dorsal abdominal 

 plate. 



Oral area as in P. niger. Appendages of cephalon as in P. niger 

 except that first antenna (fig. 121) has 24 spines on first segment and 

 10 naked setae on last. 



Legs 1-4 bii'amose, with spine and setal formula as follows : 



leg 1 leg Z leg 3 leg i 



exp. end. exp. end. exp. end. exp. end. 



seg. 1 1:0 0:0 1:0 0:0 1:0 00: VIII I 



seg. 2 VI III X VI VII II 



Legs 2-4 as in figs. 122-124. Leg 5 as in P. niger. 



Color creamy yellow with dark brown pigmentation as in figure 119. 

 Eye spots fused. Egg strings of usual type. 



Male. — Unknown. 



Remarks.— This species described by Ho (1960) from Formosa has 

 been collected by the author in Nosy Be, Madagascar, from carchari- 

 nid sharks. Its range may well be the same as P. niger but not enough 

 material has been collected on which to base a definitive conclusion; 

 nevertheless, from what is known, it appears to be a parasite of in- 

 shore species of sharks in the Indian Ocean and w^estern Pacific coast. 



Pandarus carcharini may be separated from its closely related 

 species (P. bicolor and P. niger) on the basis of the caudal ramus and 

 the spine and setal formula. Ho (1960) has already cited the similar- 

 ities between those 3 species. His comparison and description 

 implies the presence of a ventral abdominal plate. I could find no 

 evidence of a ventral plate and, after personal commvmication with 

 Ho, he agrees that this is synonomous with the abdomen and that 

 the use of the term "plate" is invalid in this case. 



Genus Phyllothereus Norman 1903 



Phyllophora Milne-Edwards, 1840, p. 471. [Type-species: P. cornutus.] 

 Nogagus. — Steenstrup and Lutken, 1861, p. 386. [Refers to N. grandis only.] 

 Laminifera Poche, 1902. [Cite Wilson, 1907, p. 361.] 



