1 



The abdomen agrees with Bate's description and figures, but the median tooth on the 

 I St tergum extends farther backwards and, being notched anteriorly, shows a different form, 

 while of the three acute spines with which the pleura of the 2"'' somite are armed, the small 

 anterior one is represented by a small rounded prominence. In a lateral view of the animal 

 the branchiostegal spine appears broader at its base than the orbital, but in Bate's figure 2 

 one observes the contrary. 



Eyes chestnut-coloured. 



The antennular peduncle is as long as the antennal scale; the 2°<> joint, half as long 

 as the I'", is twice as long as broad and appears, looked at from above, but little broader 

 distally than at its base, while it is a little broader than thick in the middle; the 3"^ joint is 

 half as long as the 2°'*. The antennular peduncle fully agrees with that of Glyph, priononota, 

 when seen laterally (Illustrations of the Zoology of the Investigator, PI. \'I, fig. irt), because 

 in Fig. I of Plate VI this peduncle has evidently been wrongly figured, the 2°<* joint appearing 

 in this figure but slightly longer than the third. In the Challenger specimens the peduncle 

 reached in the female beyond the rostrum and the s"' joint projected beyond the antennal scale 

 (C. Spence Bate, I.e., fig. i), while the 2'"i and the 3^'' joint show in this figure a slenderer 

 form than in the female from .Stat. 88. The peduncle of this female agrees very well on the 

 contrary with Bate's figure <5cf, in which the antennular peduncle of the male is figured, so 

 that in my opinion in Fig. i the peduncle has been figured much too slender. 



The antennal scale (Hg. 58a) fully resembles that of the Challenger type (C. Spence B.\te, 

 I.e., fig. I and ^9); it is 16 mm. long and 9 mm. broad, the breadth being little more than half 

 its length and it tapers distinctly to the obtuse tip. The outer margin .shows at the proximal third 

 a small obtuse prominence, the rest, no doubt, of the lateral spine, as is proved by young 

 specimens of other species, in which this spine still occurs ; this prominence was not figured by Bate. 



The 2"'' pair of legs reach to the tip of the antennal scale and are a little shorter than 

 any of the last three pairs, that all extend beyond the scale; like in other species the propodi 

 of the 4"' and 5'^ pair (Fig. 58c, 58^') end in a bru.sh of setae, while their dactyli are one and 

 a half as long as those of the }>^^ pair (Fig 58^); the latter are only grooved from the tip 

 almost to the middle, but the dactyli of the 4"> and 5"' legs are broadly grooved along their 

 whole length, with a longitudinal ridge in the middle. 



Eggs few in number, large, 4 mm. long. 



The spines, tubercles and granules of carapace and abdomen are of a scarlet colour 

 (in spirit), while the appendages are red. 



Glyph, priononota W.-Mas. .should probably be regarded as a variety of this species, 

 chiefly characterized by a smaller number of granules etc. between the carinae of the carapace. 



Both forms are represented in the West-Indies by the very closely related Glvph. spini- 

 cauda A. M.-Edw., which was figured by A. Milne-Edwards on Plate 39 of his "Recueil de 

 Figures de Crustaces nouveaux ou peu connus", in April 1883; when this figure is indeed 

 accurate, this species should differ by the s m a 1 1 size of the anterior tooth of the subdorsal 

 crest, by the antennal scale being broader and more regularly rounded at the tip, by the 

 shorter propodi of tlie three posterior legs and perhaps by still oiher differences. 



