1885.1 PROCEEDINGS OF UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 171 



are as in the typical species of Pcnanis, there are no exopods at the 

 bases of any of the peraeopods, and the branchio epipodal formula is — 



Somites. 



Epipods 



Podobianchiae . 

 Arthrobranchife 

 Pleurobranchiae 



Total. 



1 



11 + r. 

 5 



(5) 



17 + r. + (5) 



In P. constrictus and a Japanese species here doubtfully referred to 

 the P. barbatus (De Haan) the distal segment of the mandibular palpus 

 is slightly elongated and narrowed distally ; there are very small narrow 

 lamellar exopods at the bases of all the peneopods ; and there is no pleu- 

 robranchia on the thirteenth somite, the brauchio-epipodal formula 

 being — 



Somites. 



Epipods 



Podobranchiffi... 

 Arthiobrancbia' . 

 Ploiirobrancbiae . 



Total. 



(5) 



16 + (5) 



These characters might be considered of generic value, but I prefer 

 not to propose a new genus for these two species, and I am conflrmed in 

 this from the examination of two other species : a Japanese species 

 (possibly the P. ajfinis (M. -Edwards), but evidently not the species fig- 

 ured by Bate as the male of that species) which closely resembles the 

 constrictus and barbatus in general appearance, but has no exopods at 

 the bases of the posterior pemeopods aud has the epipods and branchiae 

 as in P. longirostiis^; and P. Goodei, described beyond, which, though 

 resembling the constrictus and barbatus in external characters, has the 

 mandibular palpi, epipods, and branchiae as in P. longirostris, and long 

 and slender exopods at the bases of all the perseopods. 



Parapenaeus longirostris. 



Pencens lonr/irostris Lucas, Explor. Alg^rie, Crust., p. 46, pi. 4, fig-. 6, 1849. 

 Penwus memiranaceus Heller, Sitzungsber. Akad. Wiss. Wieu, xlv, p. 423, pi. 



2,lig. 49, 1862; Crust, siidliclieu Europa, p. 296, pi. 10, fig. 11, 1863. 

 Penceus Bocagei Johnsdn, Proc. Zool. Soc. Loudon, 1863, p. 255; ibid., 1867, 



p. 900 (<^ longirostris). 



I tate this Mediterranean species, of which I have examined a speci- 

 men received from the Itev. A. M. IS'orman, as the type of the genus. 



Judging from his description, this is apparently not Kisso's Peneus 

 membranaceus (Crust, de Nice, p. 98, 1816), which is probably indeter- 

 minable. He describes the rostrum as short, and again as " un i)etit 

 rostre aplati et dente," which would apply better to the Mediterranean 



