lib' Rev. T. It. It. Stebbing on new 



& 



spines in the ordinary manner, each branch terminating in a 

 single long straight one ; the antepenultimate pair have a 

 slightly curved process at the distal end of the stem beneath 

 the rami. 



There is a cmvatme in the \)&\m of Amphithoe gammaroides, 

 as figured botli in the ' British Sessile-eyed Crustacea ' and in 

 the British-Museum Catalogue of Amphipoda, which is not 

 noticed in the description in either of those works. But it 

 seems probable that this curvature really corresponds with the 

 convexity, spoken of above, on the inner side of the palm of 

 the present species. 



Should it hereafter prove that Amphithoe ganvmaroides is a 

 Sunamphithoe, though not the Sunamphithoe we have here 

 described, this latter species will have to resign its name. 

 In that case it might well be called incequipalmata. 



The length without the antenna? is about one fifth of an 

 inch. 



Sunamphithoe conformata^ Spence Bate (male and female). 

 PI. XII. figs. 4,4 a-d. 



It may seem like going over old ground to figure and de- 

 scribe this species ; but one important part of it, namely the 

 telson, had not been clearly observed at the time of the 

 original description, and there are one or two other points 

 requiring comment. 



Only the male form has been hitherto described, at any rate 

 under the present name. Another form, which I have taken 

 at Salcombe in the same dredging with the male, and with 

 the young upon it at Meadfoot, Torquay, from the same rock- 

 pools in which the male has also been taken, is undoubtedly 

 the female of this species. The only observable difference is 

 in the shape and size of the second pair of gnathopods ; these 

 in the female are similar to the first pair, which have the same 

 form in both sexes. But hence a doubt arises whether this 

 female of 8. conformata may not probably be the Sunamphithoe 

 hamulus of Mr. Spence Bate, the first and second gnathopods 

 of which are described and figured as very similar in size and 

 shape. When there is a marked distinction between the two 

 pairs of gnathopods, it is quite consistent with analogy that 

 it should be found in the male and not in the female. The 

 flagellum of the upper antenna? in S. hamulus is described as 

 much shorter than that of S. conformata ; but the length of 

 the flagellum is apt to vary, both by accidental circumstances 

 and with the age of the animal — the female of S. conformata 

 certainly, in my specimens, having this upper flagellum ex- 



s 



