ENOPLOCLYTIA KTHERIPQE. 273 



In Reus.s' illustiutiou,"^ not only is the double niescjbrancliial 

 furrow shown but also the epibraiichial lobes. These featuies 

 are even better displayed in Geinitz's figure,'* and equally well 

 also in that of E. ve)ttrico.<a, Meyer. 5 It appears to nie, judging 

 from the figures quoted, tliat the form and degree of develop- 

 ment of tlie epibranchial lobes form good charactei's for specitic 

 separation, at any rate in tlie absence of the rostral and other 

 appendages. 



The original figures of Antaeus leachii by Mantell*' and BelF 

 are almost wliolly those of the chelae and are therefore of no 

 assistance at present, but relying on the figures of Reuss and 

 Geinitz and more particularly the beautiful illusti-ation by the 

 lattei", our form, which I purpose calling E. tena-reyiuce, 

 would appear to possess a greater development of supplemen- 

 tai'v lobes in the meso-epibranchial region ; other than this it 

 is unquestionably very close to E. leachii. 



To some extent there is a resemblance to another Cretaceous 

 genus riilijctisdina, Bell,^ but the presence in this genus of a 

 mesogasti'ic lobe enclosed within the bifurcation of the mesial 

 longitudinal sulcus at the anterior end of the carapace at once 

 tends to distinguish one from the other. 



Loc. — Barcoo River Watershed, South Central Queensland. 



* Reuss — Verstein. Bohm. Kreideformation, Abth. 1, 1845, pi. vi., 

 fig. 2. 



^ Geinitz — Charakter. Schichten Petrefacten siich. Kreid., 2 heft, 1840, 

 pi. ix., fig. 1. 



3 Meyer — Fossiler Krebse, 1840, pi. iv., fig. 29 a and b. 



6 Mantell— Foss. S. Downs, 1822, pi. xxix., figs, 1, 4, 5. 



' Bell in Dixon — Geol. and Foss. Sussex, 1850, pi. xxxviii*, figs. 6 and 

 7 (as Palcvastacus macrodactylus, Bell.) 



8 Bell— Mon. Foss. Malacostracous Crust. Gt. Brit., pt. ii., 1862, p. 34. 



