52 Mr. W. V. Guise on a new species of Alpheus. 
Differs, inasmuch as the lamellar appendage is not dilated 
towards the end; in the longitudinal carne upon the upper and 
outer surface of the larger pincers; in the proportions and 
form of the anterior feet, and in other minor particulars. 
Assimilates with A. dentipes, as with Edwardsii, in the spimous 
terminations to the supra-orbital hoods ; 
Differs, with respect to the comparative proportion between 
the two anterior pairs of legs; and inasmuch as the three hinder 
pairs of legs are not armed externally with a pointed tooth. 
Having thus shown in what respects the Alpheus from Herm 
assimilates with, and differs from, the three species above re- , 
ferred to, it remains to describe its own particular character- 
istics, which are as follows :— 
The medial line of the carapace prolonged anteriorly into a 
short beak: swpra-orbital vaults, each furnished at the extremity 
with a minute spine: anterior legs unequal; the larger hand 
having upon the upper edge two carinz, one behind the other, 
each terminating anteriorly in a small tooth projecting forwards ; 
two carine upon the outer surface of the claw, the lower one 
having a short tooth: the moveable finger not shorter than the 
immoyeable one, flattened laterally, and broad at the point : the 
immoveable finger triangular, strong, and formmg a kind of 
socket into which the opposing finger fits by a tubercle at its 
extremity: lesser pincer having a toothed keel upon its upper 
edge, equal in length to the others, but thinner, narrower, and 
much less robust: second pair of legs didactyle, slender, and 
having the wrist many-jointed. 
Length 15 lines. 
Colour deep scarlet, except the chelz, which are mottled with 
yellow. 
From the want of other works of reference, besides those of 
M. Edwards and of Professor Bell, I have it not in my power to 
ascertain whether the species now under notice has been distin- 
guished by later carcinologists ; but I have endeavoured, I think 
satisfactorily, to show that it cannot be identified with either of 
the European species of Alpheus described by the former distin- 
guished naturalist. As regards both the figure and description 
of Alpheus ruber in Bell’s ‘ British Crustacea,’ they having been 
confessedly taken from an imperfect individual, found im the 
stomach of a Cod-fish, have so little in common with my Channel 
Island example, that, if identical with it, it must be presumed 
that all the more marked points of agreement between them had 
been digested away in the interior of the fish. 
In the 8th volume of ‘ Loudon’s Magazine of Natural History,’ 
page 272, is however a notice of a Crustacean by the late Mr. 
