10 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM VOL. 125 
Ceylon—type-localities) (Stebbing, 1905); Travancore (Trivandrum) 
(Pillai, 1955); Bombay (Joshi and Bal, 1959). Red Sea and Suez Canal 
(Stebbing, 1910; Omer-Cooper, 1927; Monod, 1933). Africa: Egypt 
(Alexandria) (Larwood, 1940); Durban Bay (Stebbing, 1917; Monod, 
1931b). South America: Brazil (Loyola e Silva, 1962). New South 
Wales: Blackwattle Bay, Darling Harbour (Baker, 1928). 
With the addition of the above-listed localities in Florida and 
Hawaii, the recorded distribution of Sphaeroma walkeri is extended 
into the central Pacific and the northern hemisphere of the New 
World. Its spotty, circumglobal distribution and the fact that it has 
been taken from the hulls of boats (Larwood, 1940; Monod, 1933) 
strongly suggest dispersal by shipping. 
Although the single specimen from Hilo was damaged badly, it was 
clearly conspecific with intact specimens collected by the author in 
August 1961 from Hanamaula Bay, Kauai, and no difference could be 
found between the Hawaiian specimens and those from Florida. The 
collection of specimens of Sphaeroma walkeri from two widely separated 
Hawaiian islands and from three localities on both the east and west 
coasts of Florida indicates that this species is fairly well established 
in these two regions. It would be of great interest to know when and 
how these isopods were introduced! 
The identification of the buoy specimens as Sphaeroma walkeri 
seems certain, although there are some discrepancies between them 
and Stebbing’s (1905) original description. At least they conform as 
well to his description as do sphaeromatids from other localities that 
have been assigned to that species by several authors. They show the 
distinctive pattern of tuberculation, the characteristic number of 
lateral teeth on the uropodal exopod, and the posteriorly dished 
telson with a rounded, upturned crenate border. 
Our specimens differ from the original description of Sphaeroma 
walkeri primarily in showing epimeral sutures on the first as well as 
on the six subsequent pereonal segments. Stebbing states unequivo- 
cally that the “side plates’? (epimera) of the first segment of pereon 
of this species are ‘‘unsutured.’’ His figures, both dorsal and lateral 
views, agree with the text showing epimeral sutures on all but the 
first pereonal segment. Twelve years later, however, the same author 
(Stebbing, 1917) figures a male and female of this species from Durban 
Bay, South Africa, both lacking epimeral sutures on all seven pereonal 
segments. (Stebbing’s 1910 report of this species from the Red Sea 
gives no description or figures.) The figures of S. walkerz from different 
localities given by other authors (e.g., Pillai, 1955) clearly indicate 
epimeral sutures on all pereonal segments including the first, as in 
our specimens. 
One must conclude either that Stebbing did not attach any signifi- 
