192 TAc,|.: sk(m;s|{|-;i!(; 



AiU'V the eliinination ot these divergent elements the genus Cypridina (sensu 

 (i. W. Mt'LLERl) may certainly be said to have become considerably more uniform. 

 A further div»ision of it appears, however, to be particularly desirable. — The incompleteness 

 and uncertainty of the diagnoses and figures of the majoritv of the remaining species are, however, 

 so great that any attempt at the present moment to carry out a natural arrangement and division 

 of all these forms must be considered premature and inconvenient. 



A fairl}' large number of species belonging to this genus were found in the material that 

 formed the basis of the present treatise. Because of this it seemed to me necessary, in spite 

 of the difficulty of the task, to attempt even now to carry out a partial division of the genus in 

 question. In doing this I have, of course, chiefly taken into account the forms that I myself 

 have had occasion to investigate closely. I have tried, however, as far as possible, to show the 

 relations of these forms to species that have been previously dealt with in the literature. 



As a result oi this attempt I have establislied four new sub-genera, as shown below; these 

 sub-genera are: 



J)ol(>ria 

 Varguld 



Macrucypridina 

 Siphonosfra. 



The sub-genus Vcmjula is based on three species investigated by me but already described 

 previously, namely Cypridina norvegica W. Baihd, C. antarctica G. W. MOller and C. megalops 

 G. 0. Sahs. Besides these three species a large number of the forms included by G. W. MULler 

 under the name f)f Cypridina are probably to be referred to this sub-genus. That under these 

 circumstances the name Cypridina has not been retained for these species, but that in the present 

 work this name has been made to replace the entirely rejected generic name Pyrocypris. will 

 be found explained below; see note imder the sub-genus Cypridina. — Macrocypridina 

 comprises only one species, Cypridina castanea established by G. S. Bradv, 1897. — The 

 two remaining sub-genera, Doloria and Siphonostra, are based on species previously unknown 

 to science. Whether any previously described species belongs to the sub-genus Doloria, I cannot 

 say. To the sub-genus Siphonostra possibly belongs, besides C. (S.) spinifera described below, 

 Cypridina nohilis P. T. <_'le\'E. With regard to the relationship of the last-mentioned sub-genus 

 to Cypridina hirsuta (4. ^^^ Mt'LLER and the extremely incompletely known genus Heterodesmus 

 established by G. S. Brauv see below, note imder the sub-genus Siphonostra. — With regard 

 to the characters by which these sub-genera are distinguished I merelv refer here to the diagnoses 

 of these groups given below. 



It is true, on the one hand, that all these four sub-genera are undoubtedly fairly closely 

 related, but on the other hand they show such great differences from each other that it seems 

 to me quite correct to distinguish them. I have had some doubt as to whether it is most 

 convenient to denote these groups as genera or sub-genera. The relatively close relationship 

 that exists between these groups in compaiison with most of the previously established genera 

 of this sub-family lias induced nie to put forwartl these new units as sub-genera. The (piestion 

 is, however, not a very important one 



