2) 
scarcely studied at all. Finally he describes three stages of the pup, mentioning their 
want of internal structure during the first stage and their considerable growth, but he has 
failed to understand their mouth, nor does he mention the possibility of a very different 
development of the two sexes. He concludes with some reflections on the place which the 
new form ought to occupy in the system, thinking — with good reason — that it »in keine 
der bis jetzt aufgestellten Familien vollkommen hineinpasst« (p. 320), but that it is nearest 
akin to the Lerneide on account of similarity in the structure of the mouth, an opinion 
which I cannot share (s. below). Salensky took his species at Naples on an Amphipod 
which was many years after determined by Della Valle as Microdeutopus gryllotalpa Costa. 
About its occurrence on males as well as on females he has a statement (p. 302) which will 
be mentioned later on in the part headed »Habitation, biology and distribution<«. 
Max Weser: Die Isopoden gesammelt wihrend der Fahrten des Willem Barents in 
das nérdliche Eismeer in den Jahren 1880 und 1881 (Bijdr. tot de Dierkunde, 1884). The 
author informs us (p. 35) that in a vesicular swelling on the carapace of a specimen of 
Hippolyte Gaimardii M. Edw. he found four globular bodies which contained either eggs or 
larve, and he thought they were »Bopyriden-Larven im ersten Larven-Stadium« and that 
the eggs »werden wohl schubweise abgesetzt vom Weibchen und von einer gemeinsamen 
Hiille umgeben«. His suggestion of Bopyrid-larve is a great mistake; what he found were 
the ovisacs of a Choniostoma. The statement is only of interest in so far as it indicates 
a locality of the genus; the fact that this otherwise excellent author happens to be the 
first who found such ovisacs appears more than valueless to me, considering how he explains 
the matter, and I only mention it here, because it relates to my remarks in the criticism 
of Giard and Bonnier. 
H. J. Hansen: Oversigt over de paa Dijmphna- Togtet indsamlede Krebsdyr (Dijmphna- 
Togtets zool.-bot. Udbytte, 1887). In this paper (p. 271—278, Tab. XXIV, fig. 7—7h), 
I gave a detailed description of the female, of ova and larve of a species found on Hippolyte 
Gaimardii M. Edw. and Hipp. polaris (Sab.) in the Kara Sea, and I gave it the name of 
Choniostoma mirabile. Furthermore, on this torm I established a new family, Choniostomatide ; 
I did not know Salensky’s paper at the time, but when Prof. G. O. Sars had called my 
attention to it, I mentioned it in the French résumé worked out later on (p. 511); however, 
I maintained my new genus. In the female I found antennule, antenne and a mouth with 
supposed mandibule, the anterior branch of the maxillule and the maxille. The description 
of the mouth is not quite correct, as I did not mention the membranous mouth-border, but 
I found the hairs which I thought proceeded from the margin of the mouth; I also over- 
looked the rudimentary maxillipeds, nor did I find the genital apertures. The description 
of the larva is pretty correct on the whole, but I have with some hesitation mentioned four 
joints instead of three in the antennule, nor have I understood its olfactory seta as such. 
In 1889 Giard and Bonnier were of the opinion that the specimen found by me on Hippolyte 
polaris belonged to another species which they called Choniostoma Hanseni; this opinion 
