The Cumacea of the Purìtan Expedition. 421 



addition to it tliere is on the dorsal surface near the hind margiu 

 of the carapace a pair of sraall teeth. Ou each side of the cara- 

 pace, a little way above the lovver edge a row of about six teeth 

 riins forward from the hind margin for about Y4 of the length of 

 the carapace. The ocular lobe (fig. 1 8) resembles that of the female. 

 The texture of the carapace is coarsely cellular, as figured by 

 BoxNiER in P. echinata. The first and second leg-beariug somit es 

 are not produced into dorsal teeth as they are in the female but 

 there is a pair of tubercles on the dorsal surface of each of the 

 somites from the second to the fifth. The pleural plates of the last 

 four somites are expanded and each is armed with a marginai row 

 of spiuiform teeth. 



The first five abdominal somites are granulated on the dorsal 

 surface, the granules becoming spiniform laterally where a very 

 distinct row above and a less distinct one below define on each 

 somite a lateral groove apparently for the reception of the antennal 

 flagellum. The last segment of the antennal peduncle (fig. 19) is 

 nearly twice as long as the preceding. 



The peduncle of the nropods (fig. 20) is longer by nearly Y2 

 than the last two somites together and has on its inner edge a series 

 of piumose seta; increasing in length towards the distai end. The 

 endopod is a little less than half the length of the peduncle with 

 eiglit spines on its inner edge. The terminal spine is slender. The 

 exopod is shorter than the endopod. 



Young males agree in general characters with the female 

 described above. The carapace shows a fine vermiculate texture. 



Remarks. — The females and young males described above 

 agree with Bonnier's figures and description of bis P. annata with 

 sufficient closeness to leave little doubt of their identity with bis 

 species. That the adult males belong to the sanie species is almost 

 certain, and their Identification with Bonnier's P. echinata is highly 

 probable, though there are some important dilferences from Bonnier's 

 account. He describes the surface of the carapace as preseuting 

 "ni poils ni épine d'aucune sorte" and he figures the upper surface 

 vvithout any trace of an ocular lobe, iln view of the great difficulty 

 of observing such characters in specimens coated as they often are 

 witlì mud I think the difterences may be neglected at least uutil 

 specimens agreeing more closely with Bonnier's account are dis- 

 covered. The case is somewhat complicated however by the aberrant 

 characters of the specimens from the AVest of Irelaud which I bave 



