studios on marine Ostracocis 567 



twelve. Among these twelve species there are several of which a fairly abundant material 

 was at the disposal of the investigator, e. g. C. spinifera and C. el&janfs. This fact alone should 

 have aroused the author's suspicion. 



\Mth regard to the eight former species 1 n^ay point out the following facts: 



C. zetssios: — Only two stages, ,, Stage (?) I" and „Stage (?) 11" of this species, which 

 G. H. Fo\\l.l':i? himself established in the work in question, were found in the material investig- 

 ated by this writer and only females were found of both. The same stages were also found 

 by me in material brought home by the ,,M i c h a e 1 S a r s" from the deep sea expedition 

 of 1910. Both males and females were found. As I hope to be able to show in a subsequent 

 work on the Ostracods of this expedition, these two stages represent in all probability 

 the first and the second larval stages of C. macrocheira G. W. MOller.* Because of this G. H. 

 Fowler's assumption that the last- mentioned species is „Stage I" of C. magna C. Claus 

 also collapses. 



C. rotundata: — As is pointed out below (in a note on C. rotundala), it seems to me extremely 

 probable that this species, as it is at present taken in the literature, is not a unit; it probably 

 consists of two forms very closely related to each other, one of which has a somewhat more 

 elongated shell than the other. This view is supported by the fact, among others, that the 

 geographical distribution of these two forms does not seem to be the same; while both forms 

 are found, for instance, in the Bay of Biscay and in the greater part of the Atlantic, only the 

 more elongated form seems, on the other hand, to occur in the Antarctic. According to G. H. 

 Fowler's presentation the larvae of this species always belong to the short and high type. 

 According to what I have observed myself the larvae of the elongated Antarctic form have 

 about the same elongated type as the mature individuals. Elongated larvae are thus found. 

 It does not seem to me impossible that these also occurred in the material investigated by 

 G. H. Fowler but were overlooked on account of their small number; one ought to note the 

 great difference in number between elongated and short mature specimens in this material — 

 the latter were very numerous, the former, on the other hand, very sparse. Finally it is to 

 be noted that G. H. FoWLER did not succeed in ,, bringing out clearly the successive stages" 

 in the measurements taken by him to prove Brooks's law in this species. This fact too 

 seems to indicate that the material was not pure from a systematic point of view. 



C. spinirostris: — In the case of this species too it seems to me probable that a confusion 

 has taken place between two very closely related forms. For the reasons in support of this 

 view of mine I shall in this connection only refer to what I have written below, remarks on 

 C. spinirostris. 



C. Haddoni: — In the material investigated by G. H. FoWLER only two mature males 

 of this species were found, both with shells 2,1 mm. long, and three male larvae, all with shells 



* As can be seen fioni tlir lulUnviiig winds (1. H. I'owi.Kit liiniself iuid a presiMiliiiU'iU of the close relationship 

 lictwi'en .,C- zulesios" and C. /nacriiclirira; lie wi'ites p. 25i: ..The species obviously belonjjs lo the magna group. 

 While the shell-contour lo some extent resembles that of .,macrocheira'\ its frontal organ and the slender longer bristle 

 of the inner joint of antenna II. are very far from the iiiagna-macmclirira type; nor can it be fitted into the lengths 

 which have been worked out for that series. It is remotely possible that it may be a dimorphic parthenogenetic 

 form of magna, but parthenogenesis has not yet been shown lo occur in the llalocypridae". 



