122 Rev. A. M. Norman's Notes on British Amphipoda. 



Distrihution. Hardanger Fiord and Aalesund, Norway, 

 80-100 fath. {O. 0. Sars) ; Christiania Fiord and Hange- 

 sund [Boeck). 



The specimens found by me had all lost their antennules 

 and antennae, and, as genera were in 1868 understood, ap- 

 peared to me to be most nearly allied to Atylus. Melphiclippa 

 belongs to the Garamaridaj, which family has a secondary 

 appendage to the antennules. In M. borealis^ Boeck, and M. 

 sjnnosa, Goes, this appendage is well developed, consisting of 

 two or three articulations ; but it will be seen that Boeck 

 states that in the present species it is rudimentary, " fere 

 obsoleto ; " indeed, his figure shows no trace of it. 



Genus III. Megaluropus, Norman, 1839. 



Dr. P. P. C. Hoek, in his ' Crustacea Neerlandica,' has 

 just described the type of this genus, and has used my name, 

 which was MS. at the time he wrote, an act of tlie greater 

 courtesy, inasmuch as I was unaware that he had met with 

 the form, whicli, however, has been long known (twenty- 

 five years) to myself and friends in Britain. Dr. Hoek has 

 placed the genus in the family Pardaliscidte, a position which 

 in my opinion it cannot retain. Tiie mouth-organs are quite 

 different from those of Pardalisca. It does not, moreover, 

 agree in the following very important characters : — " Antennae 

 eupcriores . . . articulis anterioribus apud marem coalitis et 

 articulum magnum, intus fasciculis setarum instructum, junctis 

 formantibus " — or with the following particulars : — " Pedes 

 tertii et quarli par is [ = first and second perasopods] validi, 

 articulo tertio brevi. Pedes triura parium ultimorum . . . 

 unguibus longis." Had Dr. Hoek been acquainted with the 

 male or fully seen the mouth-organs he would not have 

 assigned the genus to the Pardaliscidaj. His figures of the 

 mouth-organs are very good as far as they go, except that 

 the mandible was evidently seen by him in his dissection in 

 an unsatisfactory position, while my own drawing also was 

 defective as representing a broken specimen. I now give 

 (PI. X. figs. 15 and 16) illustrations of that member in two 

 positions. The inner lamina (PL X. fig. 17) of the maxilli- 

 peds also escaped his observation, while the outer lamina and 

 palp are accurately figured ; this inner lamina is furnished at 

 the extremity with about four blunt teeth, very similar in 

 character to those of the outer lamina, and short seta3, and on 

 the distal portion of the side are a few plumose sette. The 

 inner lamina of the first maxillaj is very small, rounded, and 

 bearing two or three setae. 



