352 Records of the Indian Museum. [SMOE,; AVE 
Area I Areas II and III Area IV 
(5 localities). (8 localities). (2 localities). 
| 
| ¥ eis ? 
Labidocera minuta ..| From 4‘1 to 101% | Less than 1% or| 1% or less. 
in two localities: absent. 
less than 4° in 
others. 
Pontella spinipes .. | From §°5 to 21'5% Absent ~negessuthaneno or 
in three localities. | absent. 
Tortanus gracilis .. | Less than 1% or| Less than 4% or! From 6 to 9%. 
| absent. absent. 
| 
In addition to the above, area IV differed from all the other 
areas in the presence—though only in very small numbers—of 
Eucalanus attenuatus, Rhincalanus cornutus and Candacia truncata, 
C. aethtopica and C. pachydactyla. 
The Copepod fauna of this region of the Burma coast, considered 
as a whole, seems in many respects to be intermediate between 
that of the Arabian Sea and Ceylon on the one hand and the Malay 
Archipelago and its neighouring waters on the other; thus we 
find present such species as Centropages dorsispinatus, Centropages 
tenuivemis and Labidocera pectinata, and such variations as Pon- 
tella danae var. ceylonica, Labidocera kroyeri var. stylifera and the 
‘“« blumulosus’’ variety of Undinula vulgaris and allied species, 
all of which have so far only been recorded from the west, and 
Candacia discaudata, Calanopia thompsoni, Tortanus barbatus, Pon- 
tella princeps and Labidocera euchaeta, which link the fauna of this 
region with that of the Malay Archipelago and Pacific Ocean on 
the east. In several instances the specimens obtained furnish 
interesting examples of ‘‘ continuous’”’ variation, being interme- 
diate between specimens already known from regions on both sides 
or a further development of previously-described variations from 
Ceylon and the Arabian Sea; a more detailed account of these 
will be given under the different species. 
In the following systematic notes I have dealt solely with the 
Gymnoplea. Of these 73 different species and varieties were 
obtained, two of the former being new to science, Pseudodiap- 
tomus hickmani and Pontella investigatoris. In the table below I 
have given a list of these species and varieties and have indicated 
in the succeeding columns their presence or absence, so far as is 
at present known, from the neighbouring areas that have already 
been investigated. 
