AN OLD NAME REJECTED ALS 
Argeia, Dana, 1852. In the female the side-plates of 
the segments are developed into long lobes, but without 
adhesive processes. ‘The pleopods are short, not ramified. 
In the male the pleon is unsegmented, and without ap- 
pendages. 
Argeia pugettensis, Dana, 1852, in Crangon munitus. 
Argeia depauperata, Stimpson, 1857, in Crangon Fran- 
ciscorum, from San Francisco Bay. 
Bopyrus, Latreille, 1804. In the female the bound- 
aries of the pleon-segments are not visible in the centre of 
the back; the pleopods are pairs of simple rudimentary 
plates. In the male the pleon has no lateral appendages. 
Leach, in the Appendix to his ‘Crustaceology,’ 1814, makes 
the strange remark that ‘the genus Bopyrus is to be 
altogether rejected from this article, as it belongs to the 
class Vermes.’ 
Giard and Bonnier give up the old name Bopyrus squil- 
larum, Latreille, 1804, on the ground of the inextricable 
confusion of the synonymy, Latreille’s squillaruwm having 
been indiscriminately applied to various species, and not 
being the oldest name, since the misleading crangorum of 
Fabricius dates from 1798, and Latreille himself appears 
to have confounded Leander serratus (Pennant) and Leander 
squilla (Linn.), so that, to start with, the name of the host 
is as uncertain as the name of the parasite. 
Bopyrus Helleri, Giard and Bonnier, 1890, in Leander 
squilla (Linn.), may, notwithstanding the above arguments, 
be thought deserving of the old name sqguillarum. 
Bopyrus Fougerouxi, Giard and Bonnier, 1890, in Lean- 
der serratus (Pennant), from which the ‘ Bopyrus squillarunv’ 
of the ‘ British Sessile-eyed Crustacea’ was obtained. 
Bopyrus Rathkei, Giard and Bonnier, 1890, in Palemon 
rectirostris, Zaddach. 
Bopyrus treillianus, Giard and Bonnier, 1890, in Pulc- 
mon treillianus, Risso. 
Bopyrus xiphias, Giard and Bonnier, 1890, in Palceemoin 
wiphias, Risso. 
Bopyrus palemonis, Risso, a doubtful species in Alpheus 
sp. (?) 
