181 


of the finger), by somewhat shorter walking legs, by shallower and nar- 
rower furrows separating the postfrontal lobes and by a narrower emar- 
gination of the free margin of the front. 
All these points of difference, summed up by de Man, could be con- 
firmed by me, but, as my specimens happened to be considerably larger 
than those of de Man, I have been able to add some more particulars. 
Unfortunately, none of the 92 were carrying eggs, so that it has been 
impossible to make out, whether the subspecies gracillima should be re- 
ferred to Geosesarma, the subgenus to which Ses. sylvicola belongs but 
which is not maintained by Dr. de Man, on account of its large and few 
ovae of the ovigerous Q. 
According to de Man, the lobes at either side of the median emar- 
gination of the front show, immediately at the margin, three small tu- 
bercles in the 9, and in the © these tubercles are united into a small 
transverse crest. In my larger specimens, however, I observed (Fig. 1a) 
that each lobe, that runs from the median emargination obliquely to the 
rounded corners of the front, is divided by a very slight emargination 
into two nearly equal parts, and the tips of each part is marked by a 
small rounded: tubercle, placed very near to the margin, in both sexes, 
but somewhat more distinct in the ¢. The postfrontal lobes are separated 
by deep grooves; the median lobes, the breadth of which, as de Man 
observed, is about twice that of the lateral ones, are perpendicularly de- 
flexed anteriorly, and the slightly projecting margin of all the lobes is 
acute, not transversely furrowed. These lobes and the whole protogastrie 
regions, that are separated off distinctly from the hepatic areas, are clo- 
sely granulated, which gives these parts of the carapace a rough and 
uneven appearance. . 
As to the chelipeds, de Man says, that the superior and anterior 
(inner) border of the arm is unarmed, but in my specimens the upper 
border has a small rectangular tooth near the distal end, and the anterior 
border is, like the posterior (outer) border, coarsely serrulate, not ex- 
panded in its distal half. The wrist is not produced at the inner angle. 
Palm shorter than the fingers; the latter are nearly straight along their 
whole course, not gaping, with smooth and shining outer and inner 
surfaces. As to the armature of the mobile finger, my specimens agreed 
with the description of de Man; in the largest o there are 11 tubercles 
at the right side, and 10 at the left, but the proximal 4—5) of these 
‘are not exactly perpendicular to the long axis of the finger, but only 
more erect than the following tubercles, so that the difference in direction 
of the tubercles is in my specimens not so conspicuons as depicted by 
de Man. An important fact is the presence of a transverse row of 
