302 A HISTORY OF RECENT CRUSTACEA 
produced ; the uropods with the peduncle elongate, 
and the inner branch generally two-jointed. 
Cyclaspis, Sars, 1865, agrees with the above characters 
of Cuma, except that the carapace is swollen, 
almost globular, the eye is not always present, 
the peduncle of the uropods is not greatly elon- 
gate, and the inner branch is one-jointed. 
Iphinoe, Spence Bate, 1856, has the body slender, com- 
pressed, five segments of the trunk distinct 
behind the carapace ; the eye distinct; the second 
joint of the third maxillipeds produced ; the second 
joint of the inner branch of the uropods elongate. 
Cumopsis, Sars, 1879, has five segments of the trunk 
distinct behind the carapace ; the eye well de- 
veloped; the second joint of the third maxill- 
peds not produced. The second and third pairs 
of perzeopods have one-jointed setiferous exopods. 
Stephanomma, Sars, 1871, is uniquely devoid of the 
frontal bifurcating suture ; it has five segments of 
the trunk distinct behind the carapace. The eye 
(in the type species, Stephanomma Goésu, Sars) 
forms a coronet or circlet of eleven ocelli. 
Of the genera thus briefly distinguished, Cuma, ‘a 
wave,’ has given its name to the whole sub-order, although 
not in fact the earliest named genus in it. Cuma scor- 
pioides (Montagu, 1804) is a British species. The cara- 
pace is strong and strongly ridged longitudinally. The 
inner branch of the uropods is two-jointed. In Bell's 
‘History of the British Crustacea’ a lamentable confusion 
is made. It quotes in full Goodsir’s descriptions of his 
own Cuma Edwardsii and Milne-Edwards’ Cuma Audoumu, 
but, as Sars has pointed ont, the figures copied under the 
heading Cuma Audouinit belong to Cuma Edwardsi, and 
vice versd. As a matter of fact Goodsir’s Cuma Hdwardsu 
is a synonym of Cuma scorpicides (Montagu). Bodotria 
arenosa, Goodsir, is, I think, a distinct species of Cuma, 
separated from the other four species of that genus by 
having the inner branch of the uropod single-jointed. 
