170 'rA(ii'; sKoasBERO 



Mandible: lii the sub-fanuly Cypridininae there also sometimes appears on the 

 coxale an endite of about the same type as in the females of Philomedes , namely in 

 Crossophorus. 



The maxilla and the fifth limb in the males of the genus Philomedes do not form 

 any transitional type to the same organs in the genus Asterope; they are, on the contrary, 

 of quite the same type as in the females, with the only difference that most of the parts, 

 especially the masticatory parts, are very much reduced, a reduction that is closely connected 

 with the peculiarity that the males of this genus do not eat food after attaining sexual 

 maturity, but die comparatively soon after fertilization. 



Sixth limb: The statement that the different joints of this limb are not moved 

 by special muscles in the genus Philomedes is also due to a mistake ; at least in all the species 

 of this genus investigated by me this a2)pendage possessed as well-developed a muscular 

 system as the species of the sub-family Cypridininae that I have had the opportunity to 

 study personally. 



Seventh limb: The distal armament of this limb in Philomedes cannot be 

 said to form a transitional type between that of the sub-family Cypridininae and that of 

 the family Asteropidae; on the contrary it forms an independent type, strongly resembling 

 that of the sub-family Cypridininae. 



On the furca secondary claws, ,,Nebendornen", may also appear in the sub-family 

 (lypridininae. 



The rod-shaped organ cannot apparently be used as evidence either for or against 

 a closer relationship between Philomedinae and the A s t e r o p i d s, as this organ is 

 subject to far too profotind variations within the sub-order Cypridiniform.es. In addition 

 it shows but a rather slight agreement in Philomedes and Asfempe. 



The upper lip both in Philomedes and Asterope has a glandular field, though a small 

 one. The small size of this organ in these two genera may be considered a primitive feature. 

 The characters that G. W. MOller put forward as evidence for his hypothesis mav 

 consequently be divided into three categories: 



1) those in which Gr. W. MllLLER was mistaken, 



2) those which cannot be used as evidence in this problem on account of their great 

 variability, and 



3) those which may possibly be suspected of appearing in Asteropidae and 

 Philomedinae imder a comparatively primitive tyije. 



To the first of these categories the following characters wotild belong: the maxilla, the 

 fifth, sixth, and seventh limbs and the furca. — This author was also mistaken with regarrl 

 to the selvage of the shell and the glandular field of the upper lip. 



To the second category would belong the sculpture of the shell and the rod-shaped organ. 



To the third category: the selvage of the shell, the upjser lip and the characters taken 

 from the protopodite of the mandible. 



It may be impo.ssible at present to prove with full evidence that the charac- 

 ters included in the last category reallv bear an impression of jiriinitiveiicss in PIn'ln- 



