262 L- A. BORBADAILE. 



placed in the subgenus Cyclodius, being less than half the breadth of the carapace. In any 

 case the species seems to be a transitional one. 



The specimens mentioned under the name of this species in the P. Z. S. for 1900 were 

 small individuals of Leptodius sanguiiieus. 



Taken on the reef on Male Atoll and dredged in 25 fathoms in South Nilandu Atoll. 



Fig. 57. Chlorodopsis espinosus; a. whole animal, b. outside of hand, c. ends of fingers to show hoof-like tips, 



d. end of walking leg enlarged. 



73. Chlorodopsis espinosus, n. sp. (Fig. 57). 



Diagnosis : " A Chlorodopsis whose length is just under f of the breadth, the carapace 

 hairless, of even surface but minutely granular, areolated as in C. frontalis (Dana) ; the front 

 slightly arched, slightly notched in the middle, with thickened edge ; the anterolateral edge 

 with five sharp teeth (including the orbital angle), of which the two hindei-most are thorn- 

 like ; the hinder edge slightly arched ; the orbital gap very narrow, so that the prolongation 

 of the basal joint of the antenna is hard to see; the fore edge of the meropodite of the third 

 maxilliped only slightly concave, with a small projection at its inner end ; the chelipeds equal, 

 without tubercles or thorns except one shai-p thorn at the inner angle of the wrist, the hand 

 narrow, with a faint groove above and a groove down each finger, the fingers fis long as the 

 upper edge of the palm, gaping, with a few sharpish teeth and hoof-like ends; and the walking 

 legs hairy, with spines on the end-joints, and a double end-claw." 



Length : 8 mm. Breadth : 12 mm. (Largest specimen.) Colour in spirit : white ; the 

 fingers brown with white tips. 



This species differs fi-om most Chlorodopsis in the absence of spines fi:om the back and 

 chelipeds. 



Taken in Funadu Velu, Miladumadulu Atoll. 



74. ? Chlorodopsis (Cyclodius) ornata Dana, 1852. Alcock, ill. p. 171. 



I have assigned several small specimens to this species, but am uncertain whether they 

 are not really the young of Phymodius imgulatus. They agree with Alcock's definition, except 



