SUidies oil inariiii' Ostracods 563 



by J. Lubbock, i860. G. 0. Sars was mistaken about the genus Haloci/pris; this writer included 

 in this genus not only the species placed in it by J. D. Dana but also Conchoecia 

 obtusata G. O. Sars and C. curta J. Lubbock [= C. Clausii (G. 0. Sars)], two forms which do 

 not belong here at all; cf. also G. 0. Sars 18.90, p.. 53. G. S. Brady, 1880 again combined these 

 forms in one genus, Conchoecia, as he could not find in J. I). Dana's descriptions ,,any differences 

 sufficient, in my opinion, to form grciuiids of generic distinction". Th. Scott, 1894, used the 

 generic name Halocypris for all the species of this group that were investigated by him. The 

 difference between these two geiicia had, however, already be(>n pretty well settled in V. Glaus's 

 works, 1874 a and b. 



G. 0. Sars, 1865, employed the same classification as J. D. Dana, but with the difference 

 that the latter investigator's family Halocypridae was denoted as the sub-order Myodocopa 

 and the sub-families Cypridininae and Halocyprinae as the families Cypridinidae and Conchoc- 

 ciadae; cf. p. 155 above. The Halo c y p r i d s are denoted by all other writers as a family; 

 most of them use the name Halocypridae; cf. p. 555 above. 



C. Claus, 1874 a, established a new genus Halocypria and G. W. Muller 1890 a another, 

 Eueonchoecia, but apart from this these writers did not undertake any further division of this 

 group in tlie works mentioned. 



In C. Claus's work of 1890 we find the following far-reaching classification of this group: 



Conchoecia J. I). 1) a\a. 

 Paraconchoecia n. g. 

 Conchoecetfa n. g. 

 Conchoecilla n. g. 



Sub-family 

 Conchoecinae 



Conchoecissa n. g. 



Pseudoconchoecia n. g. 

 Mikroconchoecia n. g. 



Sub-family ( Halocypris J. I). 13a\a. 

 Halocyprinae \ Halocypria C. Claus. 



This author uses the same classification in his following works (1891 a and 1894). His 

 example was followed by several investigators: G. S. BPvADV and A. M. Norman, 1896, G. S. 

 Brady, 1897, 1902 a, 1903, 1907, P. T. Cl-EVE, 1900. 1905. A. M. NOR.MAN. 1905 and A. ScOTT, 

 1905. (The last-mentioned writer only partly, as he denotes Mikroconchoecia as Conchoecia). 



(j. W. MCllei! in his great Naples monograph, 1894, established a new genus of this 

 group, Archiconchoecia. This writer strongly opposed C. ClaUS's classification just mentioned. 

 On p. 223 of the work just referred to he pointed out. first, that of the seven genera into which 

 C. Glaus divided the genus Conchoecia no less than five were represented only by a single species 

 and, secondly, that the differences that exist between these genera are rather slight. With 

 regard to the classification of the sub-families Conchoecinae and Halocyprinae this author writes: 

 ,.Da beide Formen" (Halocypris and Halocypria) „naher mit einander verwandt sind als mit 

 Eueonchoecia oder Archicoyichoecia . oder als diese unter einander, so wi'irde sich als Consequenz 

 ergeben, daB wir fiir diese beiden (hirdi jc 1 Art vertretenen Gattungen ji' eine be.sondere Familic 



