NO. 1573. PARASITIC COPEPODS— WILSON. 451 



Smith, in 1899, recognized this as a Perissopus and relocated it cor- 

 rectly under that genus. 



Beneden gives us absohitely no data as to the size of either the No- 

 gaus male or the female CMamys, nor as to the hosts upon which they 

 were found. We learn incidentally that they both came from the 

 Ai'chipelago of the Azores, and the CMamys is further located from 

 the Bay of Dakar. Since this CMamys proves to be a Perissopus 

 female, and since the Nogaus male conforms in its anatomy to the 

 type of Perissopus males, it is possible that it will ])rove to be the 

 male of this Perissopus (Chlamys) incisus. 



At all events it is not a Pandarus male, and least of all that of the 

 species cranchii, the true male of which is described on page 405. 



SPECILLIGUS CURTICAUDIS Dana. 



SpeciUlfiiis cKiiicnudis Dana, 1852, p. 1375, pi. xcv, figs. a to h. 

 A male NesippHS (see p. 434). 



DINEMATURA ELONGATA (Nogaus male) Beneden. 



Dincinoum dongata Benedent, 1892 a, p. 2.S1, pi. ii, ligs. 11 to 13. 

 Probably a Dineriiatura male' (see p. 382). 



NOGAGUS ELONGATUS Heller. 



Nogngus elongaius Heller, 1865, p. 206, pi. xx, fig. 5. 



This was described as a new species by Heller, but he added the 

 statement that it was found in company with Pandarus dentatus and 

 was probably the male of this latter species. 



Bassett-Smith, in 1899, accepted this statement and gave the name 

 as a synonym of Pandar^us dentatus, but with a question mark after 

 it. A careful examination of the description and figures given by 

 Heller render it probable that this species is not a Pandarus male, 

 but that it belongs to the genus Perissopus for the following reasons: 

 The carapace is much longer than wide with very long and narrow 

 posterior lobes; well-defined conspicilla are present near the anterior 

 border and there are no accessory lobes. 



The swimming legs have long and slender rami instead of short 

 and stocky ones; the pattern of the legs and the number and arrange- 

 ment of the setse conforms more closely to the type seen in Perissopus 

 than to that seen in Pandarus; the fourth legs have but a single joint 

 in each ramus. The genital segment is not enlarged, but is short and 

 small, and shows no traces of either the fifth or sixth legs. The abdo- 

 men is small and contains but a single joint, instead of the two found 

 in Pandarus males. 



It has therefore been placed under the genus Perissopus awaiting 

 further evidence. 



