162 Carcinological Fauna of India. 
Hyesopurys, Wood-Mason. 
Hypsophrys swperciliosa, Wood-Mason, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., March, 1891, 
. 269. 
ji Hypsophrys, Alcock, Investigator Deep Sea Brachyura, p. 12. 
Carapace deep, longer than broad, quadrilateral or ovate-oblong, 
with deep vertical parallel sides, the gastric region well delimited and 
occupying its anterior half, the linea anomurica dorsal, distinct or 
indistinct. 
Front narrow, forming a simple or bifid rostrum which has a spine 
on either side of its base. 
~ The orbits do not afford any concealment to the eyes, but form, on 
either side of the rostrum, a broad concave facet sharply marked off 
from the rest of the carapace by a ridge that arches round dorsally 
from the rostrum to the antennal spine: at the upper and inner angle 
of this facet is a well defined hollow that catches the knee of the 2nd 
and 3rd joints of the antennulary pedencle when fixed. The eyes are 
well formed: the terminal joint of the eyestalk is barrel-shaped much 
as in Homola, but the slender basal joint is short or obsolescent, so that 
the eyes do not appreciably project beyond the edge of the orbital facet. 
The antennules and antenne are identical with those of Homola. 
The mouth-parts also are very like those of Homola, but as the 
outer border of the merus of the external maxillipeds is hardly at all 
expanded these appendages are even more pediform than in Homola. 
Chelipeds slender, spiny, equal. Legs of the first three pair long, 
with broad compressed meropodites. Fourth pair of legs short, very 
slender, cheliform, their dactylus, which is many times shorter than 
their propus, shutting down against and co-terminous with the slightly 
expanded distal end of the propus. 
The abdomen of both sexes consists of seven separate segments. 
In general form Hypsophrys resembles Homola barbata, but it differs 
from Homola in the following particulars :— 
1. The eyestalks are like those of Dromia, the long slender basal 
joint of Homola being reduced to next to nothing. 
2, Though there are no true orbits there are distinct orbital 
facets, and the homologies of these with the orbits of Dromia—in 
respect both of conformation and of common use for eyes and anten- 
nules—are unmistakeable. 
3. The external maxillipeds are unequivocally pediform, the 
merus being hardly broader than the ischium. 
4. The fourth (last) pair of legs have the subchele or chelw quite 
different in form: the propodite is long and is slightly expanded at its 
distal end, and the dactylus is a minute joint, ever so much smaller 
612 
