On Hyale gvenfelll, Chilton. 273 



•with one anotlier nor witli tlie sex, no structural difference is 

 apparent. Now the thoracic dorsum varies greatly ; of the 

 seven males, one is clear red (typical rufa), one has side-lines 

 just in front of the scutellum, one has side-lines complete but 

 no middle one (this is typical inncrogramma by comparison 

 with Speiser's full descri|)tion), one has side-lines and a faint 

 middle one in front, one has all these lines well marked, one 

 has all the lines broad and even confluent at the middle of 

 the disc, and another has the lines reddisli biit a little dark 

 behind. Of the four females, one is quite immaculate, one 

 has only the faintest trace of the lines in red, one has the 

 lines all present but faint, tiie last has all present and very 

 strong. The author is quite sure that S[)eiser^3 macro- 

 gramma is a dark-lined form of riifa. As regards the two 

 species of Loew {^I'ufa and lateralis), some doubt may arise. 

 Loew evidently had single specimens only (j-ufa is described 

 from a ? , lateralis from a J' ; see B. E. Z. 1874, xliv. 

 p. 194). The main difference appears to be dark flecks in 

 the antennal pits in the latter species and (possibly) less 

 hairy arista. It is impossible to be sure of tlie true distinct- 

 ness of these three species, and hence the author considers all 

 the red Loxoceras with entirely black third joint to be L. rufa^ 

 Loew. 



S. EhodesiA: Salisbury and Chirinda Forest {G. A. K. 

 Marshall, Camb. Coll.). Natal : Durban {F. Miiir, Camb. 

 Coll.). 



XXI. — Further JS^otes on the New Zealand Amphipod Hyale 

 grenfelli, Chilton. By Chas. Chilton, M.A., D.Sc, 

 M.B., CM., LL.D., O.M.Z.S., Professor of Biology, 

 Canterbury College, New Zealand. 



In May 1916 * I described a new species of Amphipod from 

 New Zealand, naming it Hyale grenfelli. The type-specimen, 

 which was the only specimen at that time known, was a 

 male, and was characterized by the peculiar shape of the 

 second gnathopod and by the great dilatation and setose 

 character of the terminal joints of the maxillipeds. I pointed 

 out that it was quite likely that this peculiar development of 



* Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 8, vol. xvii. p. 362. 



