﻿South African Crustacea. 63 



part 2, p. 17, Slaagten Scyllarus) distinguished as species of 

 Scyllanis : 1. arctus (Linn.) ; 2. acquinoctialis ; 3. antarcticus ; 

 4. oricntalis. In this brief but admirable treatise Lund compares 

 and distributes the illustrative figures from various authors, which 

 had been so absurdly referred to a single species. At the same date 

 Herbst gives a confused synonymy to his Cancer {Astacus) arctus 

 (including Scyllarus arctus, Fabricius), but his description and 

 figure make it quite clear that the species is not the Cancer arctus 

 of Linnaeus discussed above, and further that it is the Scyllarus 

 orientalis of Lund. Consequently, as the name arctus is preoccupied, 

 Herbst's species so-called becomes a synonym of Lund's orientalis, 

 subsequently referred to the genus Thenus, Leach. 



Herbst's second species, Cancer {Astacus) ursus major, competes 

 with Lund's third, Scyllarus antarcticus ; since both writers agree 

 in identifying the species with Eumph's tab. 2, fig. C, and Seba's 

 tab. 20, fig. 1. Lund's specific name is misprinted antarctcius in 

 the Suppl. Eat. Syst. of Fabricius, 1798, and misquoted as ant- 

 articus by Milne Edwards in 1837. The latter author gives C. ursus, 

 Seba, as the name applying to Seba's pi. 20, f. 3 [error for f. 1]. 

 But Guerin, in the description of that plate (as reproduced in 1827) 

 writes : " No. 1. Ursa-cancer, seu Squilla lata, amboinensis, Seb. — 

 Scyllarus antarcticus, Fabricius." De Haan (Crust. Japon.,decas 5, 

 p. 133, 1841), has already called attention to the difference of 

 Eumph's fig. C from others supposed to be identical. But Herbst's 

 figure of ursus major and that which Milne-Edwards gives of Ibacus 

 antarcticus in the illustrated edition of the "Eegne Animal," pi. 45, 

 fig. 3, are in good agreement, and Herbst's specific name having 

 been accompanied by an excellent coloured figure from the first, 

 should have a preference over Lund's name of the same date, but 

 with a bare description. The species, after its transfer by Milne 

 Edwards to Ibacus, Leach, was again transferred by Dana in 1852 

 to a new genus, Parribacus. Immediately after this transfer Dana 

 proceeds to describe it as Ibacus antarctictis (Eumph), in U.S. 

 Expl. Exp., vol. 13, p. 517, 1852, although Eumph has nothing to 

 do with either the generic or the specific name, and was probably 

 concerned with a different species of the genus. Herbst's figure is 

 without the row of tubercles down the centre of the carapace, which 

 are conspicuous in Seba's and Dana's figures and faintly marked in 

 that given by Milne Edwards ; but this detail does not appear to be 

 important. The acceptance of the name Parribacus ursus (Herbst) 

 in place of Parribacus antarcticus (Lund) has the advantage of dis- 

 placing a name so puzzling and inappropriate as antarcticus for 



