448 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol. xxxiii. 



PANDARUS AFFINIS (Nogaus male) Beneden. 



Pandarus ajjlnis Beneden, 1892 a, p. 224, pi. i, figs. 5 to ]1. 

 The male of Nesipjms amjustatus Beneden (see p. 431). 



NOGAGUS ANGUSTATUS Beneden. 



Nogagus angustal.us Beneden, 1892 b, p. 245, pi. i, iigs. 5 to JO. 

 Two females, adult and yomig, the latter Beneden's "male," 

 both belonging tothe genus Nesipims, species angustaius (see p. 432). 



NOGAGUS AUGUSTULUS Gerstaecker. 



Nogugiis angasluU(s Gerstaecker, 1854, ]). 193, jtl. vii, iigs. 17 to 18. 

 The male of Cianglioinis pyriforrnis described in the same paper 

 (see p. 350). 



PANDARUS ARMATUS (Nogaus male) Thomson. 



Pcmdanis uniuUus (male) THOMSt)N, 1889, p. 363, pi. xxvii, figs. 1 a to/. 

 In describing this species among the parasitic copepods of New 

 Zealand in 1889, Thomson gives the figure and description of a speci- 

 men taken along with the females, which he assumed must be the 

 male of the species. But, on comparing this figure and description 

 with the one given in the same paper for the male of his new species, 

 Dinematura (EchtJirogaleus) 7ieo2eal(mica, it is at once evident that 

 they are identical. Both were obtained, to quote his own language, 

 which is the same in the two cases, "by the captain of the whaling 

 barque Splendid, presumably off a shark." They agree exactly in 

 size, in the proportions and shape of the various body parts, and 

 in the details of the appendages. This agreement is most noticeable 

 in the fourth legs, which in both forms have a two-jointed endopod 

 and a three-jointed exopod, unlike all the other Nogaus species. 

 With this single exception they both conform exactly to the type 

 here established for Echthrogaleus males, and may be referred to 

 that genus. 



PANDARUS BICOLOR (Nogaus male) T. Scott. 



Pandarus bicolor T. Scott, 1900, p. 157, pi. vi, figs. 33 to 38. 



This author, who has done a large amount of excellent work 

 upon fish parasites, particularly in Scottish waters, and who has 

 published many valuable papers, described in the Eighteenth Annual 

 Report of the fisher}' board of Scotland, a J\fog(ius -like copepod 

 which he considered as the male of Pandarus hicolor. 



On examination of his description and the figures whicli accom- 

 pany it, this Nogaus is found to conform in every detail with the 

 other Pandarus males, and it may therefore be accepted as the male 

 of the species to which Scott refers it. 



