584 



elongated. These appendages are however, as I have been enabled to 

 ascertain from a series of specimens kindly sent me by the Rev. Mr. Stebbing 

 and liy M. Chevreux, subjected to some variation as to length, and the 

 number of joints in the flagella is also rather variable. 



Occurrenre. — I have never my.self met with this form, but Boeck 

 states its occurrence at Farsund and Haugesund. The female specimen here 

 figured is that originally described by Boeck as Sunampliithoe liamulut^ ; the 

 male specimen, as also the several detail-figures, have, on the other hand, been 

 drawn from French specimens. 



Distribution. — British Isles (Sp. Bate), coast of France (Chevreux), 

 Azores (Barrels), 



Gen. 3. Sunamphithoe, Sp. Bate, 1857. 



Syn: Amphithoe, Boeck (part). 



Form of body about as in the preceding genera. Cephalon not very 

 deep and having the frontal part scarcely produced. Coxal plates of moderate 

 size, 5tli pair fully as large as the preceding pair. Eyes small, orbicular. 

 Antennte of the very same appearance in the 2 sexes, the superior ones being 

 very elongated and slender, considerably longer than the inferior, and without 

 any accessory appendage. Mandibles without any trace of palps. Posterior 

 lip with the outer lobes bifid at the tip. Oral parts otherwise resembling 

 those in the genus Fleonexes. Gnathopoda in female rather feeble and 'but 

 sligthly unequal, propodos oblong and transversely truncated at the tip; those 

 of male very unequal, the posterior ones being greatly developed, with 

 the propodos extremely large and oval in form. The 2 anterior pairs of 

 pereiopoda with the basal joint laminarly expanded; the 3 posterior pairs 

 successively increasing in length, and having the propodal joint simple, not 

 subcheliform, basal joint of antepenultimate pair very broad, that of tlie 

 last 2 pairs oblong oval in form. Last pair of uropoda of a similar structure 

 to that in Fleonexes. Telson very small, with only a small tuberculiform 

 projection on either side of the tip. 



RemarJcs. — The generic diagnosis given by Sp Bate of his genus 

 Sunamphithoe, does not, it is true, agree with that here given, as it was set 

 up merely in reference to one of the 2 species included by him in this 

 genus, viz., *S'. hamulus. But as this species has turned out to be only the 



