86 
but as for Lerneopodide, there is a considerable resemblance in various points, e.g. in the 
structure of the male and the female, and especially in that of the larve; at the same time, 
there are numerous and important differences. However, as the family Lerneopodide is 
comparatively well known'), I do not think it necessary to repeat and compare all the 
characteristics of the two families, but will content myself with stating my opinion that the 
Choniostomatide, though coming much closer to the Lernzopodide than to any other form 
of parasitic Copepoda, yet differ very much from them in the way they lay their eggs, in 
their development after the first larval stage, in several peculiarities in the internal and 
external structure of the male (e. g. in that of the mouth), and most conspicuously, in the 
structure of the mouth, the antenne and the maxillipeds of the female. A comparison of the 
figures in: W. Kurz: Studien tiber die Familie der Lerneopodiden (Zeitschr. fiir wiss. 
Zool., B. XXIX, 1877)« with my present work, will give the best idea of the resemblances 
and the differences between the adults of these two families. In elucidation of the matter 
IT will add, that Kurz concludes from the development that the pair of limbs which in the 
females of Lernzopodide are fused together into one long arm that serves as organ of 
fixation, are the »first pair of maxillipeds.« If this be correct — which is quite possible 
— this appendage would correspond to what I term the maxille. 
1) In the above-mentioned ,Grundziige* (p. 557—58), Claus enumerates most of its characteristics and 
refers to the most important accounts of its structure and development. 

