some Species of Palamneus. 41 
For in the former the tail is more than three and a half times 
the length of the cephalothorax, while in the latter it is less. 
This circumstance strengthens the evidence of identity 
between P. spinifer and P. Petersiz; for the figure of P. 
spinifer shows that the tail (judging from the sketch of the 
lateral view of it) is a little over three and a half times the 
length of the cephalothorax. 
Mons. Simon has recorded a species which he considers to 
be Petersvi from Bintang. ‘The males of his specimens, how- 
ever, are not like those that I here call spénifer, inasmuch as 
they are declared to be like longimanus, Herbst. ‘This opens 
the interesting question of possible dimorphism in the males. 
Now three male examples have been described without 
their females being known. These are /ongimanus of Herbst, 
longimanus of C. Koch (which is not the same specimen at 
least as Herbst’s type), and angustimanus of Thorell. I give 
a table to show the dimensions of these specimens, together 
with those of two examples in the British Museum which I | 
provisionally refer to angustiémanus. A glance shows that 
the two examples named longimanus have the hand-back very 
short and the movable dactylus long, the difference between 
the two being 7°5 and 8 millim. respectively, whereas in the 
others the difference is *5, 2, and 2°5 millim. But this great 
interval is almost entirely bridged over by some of the male 
specimens of spinifer. Thus in no. 5 the difference in length 
between the dactylus and the hand-back is 3, in no. 1 it igs 
3°5, in nos. 2 and Git is 4, inno. 4 it is 4°5, and in no. 3 it is 
6—the amount of variation being considerable. 
I am consequently disposed to think that at least longi- 
manus of C. Koch may be a form of the male of spinifer, and 
T hold the same opinion with regard to the two males in this 
collection that [have named angustimanus. P. costiémanus of 
C. Koch is also, I think, probably synonymous with spinifer, 
It is worthy of note in connexion with this subject that the 
slenderness of the hand appears to be correlated with the 
longitudinal wrinkling of the upper surface. Consequently 
the presence of strong coste on the hands of these males that 
have just been discussed need not point to specific distinction 
between them and spinifer, in which the cost are less 
manifest. 
