A Question concerning a British Pagurid, 99 



that they will prove to be referable to Grandidieri. There is 

 also the unidentifiable specimen from Mombasa referred to 

 above and one from South Africa (? West Africa), probably 

 belonging to multicosiis, obtained by Capt. Burton. 



From considerations of geographical distribution I should 

 be inclined to think that the specimen from CafFraria, described 

 by Porat as Grandidieri, will prove to belong to crotalus 

 ((Efv. Vet.-Akad. Forhandl. 1871, p. 1162). 



XIII. — A Question concerning a British Pagurid. ByjAMES 

 E. Benedict, Assistant Curator, Department of Marine 

 Invertebrates, U.S. National Museum. 



British naturalists have not recognized Pagurus Krdyeri*^ 

 Stimpson, as a valid species. They refer it to P. pubescenSf 

 Kroyer, or, as Mr. Henderson lias done, call it pubescens, var. 

 Kroi/ei'i. On this side of the Atlantic the species is recog- 

 nized as distinct from pubescens. P. Kroyeri and P. pubescens 

 are quickly and accurately separated not by the pubescence^ 

 abundant on iheone and comparatively inconspicuous on the 

 other species, but by the marked difference in the form of the 

 left hand, as the most obvious character (see figs A and B, 

 p. 100). The idea that British naturalists cannot as readily 

 see these characters with both species before them is not to be 

 entertained. We must look further for the explanation. 

 Prof, S. I. Smith saysf: — " Kroyer's figure in Gaimard's 

 ' Voyages en Scandinavie,' Crustacds, pi. ii. fig. 1, evidently 

 represents the Kroyeri^ although the tubercles upon the 

 chelipeds are represented in the figures as a little too large and 

 more scattered than in any specimens I have seen ; but this is 

 probably due to a slight and very natural inaccuracy on the 

 part of the artist or engraver ; the original description of 

 Pagurus pubescens (' Naturhistorisk Tiilsskrift,' ii. p. 251, 

 1859), however, applies best to the other species, which Kroyer 

 evidently had before him when writing the first phrase of the 

 diagnosis — * cephalothoracis superficie dorsali pedibusque pilis 

 flavis dense obsilis ' — which would not apply to any specimens 

 of Kroyeri or to his figure published ten years after. Kroyer 



* It seems necessary to change the name of the group of which 

 Bernhardus is the type to Pagurus. I believe that the genus Pagurus, 

 as now constituted, does not contain a single one of the original species 

 placed in it by Fabricius ; but, be that as it may, a valid and therefore 

 imperative reason for mailing the change lies in the fact that Bernhardus 

 was designated as the type of Pagurus by Latreille in 1810 (Condd, 

 Gener. Crust, p. 423^. 



t Trans. Conn. Acad. v. p. 49. 



7* 



