secund antenna. 



5S4 TAGE SKOGSBERG 



cedure adopted by G. W. MtJLLEH is quite correct. The characters on which C. Clals chiefly 

 based the genus Halocypria, the different development of the rostrum of the shell and of the 

 masticatory pad and the lancet bristles on the coxale of the mandible, seem to me to be of 

 so slight a nature that they constitute quite insufficient grounds for this classification. 

 Endopodiw of ihe As is Seen from the description given above there is on the end joint of the endopodite 



of the female second antenna a peg-like little process between two of the bristles on this joint 

 (more exactly between the h- and i-bristles). This process, which certainly corresponds to the 

 similarly situated peg- or bristle-like appendage on the female second antenna in a number of 

 species of the genus Conchoecia (see, for instance, my fig. 8 of C. elegans) is noteworthy because 

 it has no homologon in the mature males. On the other hand it is often found in male larvae 

 of Stage I. The size and shape of this process makes one inclined, of course, to homologize it 

 with the e-bristles (cf. the genus Conchoecia); a ck)ser investigation shows, however, that these 

 appendages have c|uite different positions. The first is, as is mentioned above, situated between 

 the h- and i-bristles, i. e. on the original third joint, the e-bristle is situated basally-anteriorly 

 of the f-bristle, i. e. on the original second joint. I wish to point out in this connection the little 

 process situated proximo-anteriorly of the f-bristle in my figure 9 of C. elegans, c? juvenis in 

 Stage I; this process certainly corresponds to the e-bristle in the mature males. In this species 

 there is also at this stage a little process between the h- and i-bristles, which is of about the same 

 type as in the mature females. The same figure also shows that this process cannot be homologous 

 to the c- or d-bristles, which would, of course, be exceedingly improbable, because these two 

 bristles, like the e-bristle, belong to the original second joint. 



Halocypris brevirostris (j. D. Dana). 



? Conchoecia brevirostris -f C. inflata, J. 1). Dana, 1849, p. 52. 



? Halocypris inflata -\- H. brevirostris, J. I). Dana, 1852, pp. 1301 and 1303; pi. XCI, 



figs. 8 and 9. 

 brevirostris -\- H. Toynbeeana, J. LUBBOCK, 1860, p. 16 (188) and 17 (189); 



pi. XXIX, figs. 35—39. 

 concJui, C. Clau.s, 1874 a, p. 177. 



1874b, p. 7; pi. II, figs. 20—25, pi. Ill, figs. 26—35. 

 brevirostris, G. S. Brady, 1880, p. 166; pi. XXXIX, figs. 1—11. 

 ., concha -\- H. pelagica -j- H. distincta, C Claus, 1890, pp. 24 and 25. 



dubia + var. ma'JQr, G. W. MCller, 1890 a, p. 269; pi. XXVIII, figs. 19, 23, 

 24, 30, 35. 

 ,, concha + H. pelagica, C. Claus, 1891a, pp. 77 and 78; pi. VIII, fig. 12; 



pi. XI, figs. 6, 7; pi. XXI, figs. 1—11; 

 pi. XXII, figs. 1—12; pi. XXIV, figs. 6—20 

 md pi. XXVI, fig. 1*. 



ai 



* In the explrtiialion t<\ pi. .X.W'i this sporii-s is named Ifalncyiins allantica. 



