456 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol. xxxm. 



PANDARUS MUSTELI-LiEVIS (Nogaus male) Hesse. 

 Pandarus musteli-lsevis Hesse, 1883, p. 23, pi. vi, figs. 6-8, 14, 18, and 21-23. o 



This Nogaus form is another of Hesse's fabrications, his new species 

 being founded on a single male and a young female. 



Enough data can not be obtained from Plesse's text and figures to 

 determine where this species belongs; the figures he presents are 

 wretched, badly confused, and highly contradictory, while the text 

 gives none of those data which are essential in accurate systematiza- 

 tion. In fig. 6, which is a dorsal view of the male, the second legs 

 are each uniramose and one-jointed; in fig. 7, which is a ventral 

 view of the same specimen, the second legs are each biramose, the 

 rami of the left one being one-jointed, while the right one has a two- 

 jointed exopod and a three-jointed endopod. The first legs are 

 similar to those described for his Nogagus spinacii-achantias (see p. 

 458), and are radically different from anything ever seen. The rami 

 of the fourth legs as seen in dorsal view are one-jointed, while in 

 ventral view they are two-jointed. The abdomen in dorsal view is 

 two-jointed, the terminal joint extending out over the bases of the 

 anal lamina? in two broad, rounded lobes; in ventral view it is three- 

 jointed, the terminal joint triangular and contracted nearly to a point 

 between the anal lamintTB. The species as it stands, therefore, can 

 not be located anywhere with even reasonable probability. 



DINEMATURA MUSTELI-L^VIS (Nogaus male) Hesse. 



Dinemoura musteli-lsevis Hesse, 1880, p. 5, pi. i, figs. 1-16. 

 Probably belongs to the genus Demoleus (see p. 386). 



DINEMATURA NEOZEALANICA (Nogaus male) Thomson. 



Dinematura neozealaniea Thomson, 1889, p. 359, pi. xxv, fig. 2. 



Thomson here described both sexes of a new species which he 

 placed in the genus Dinematura; they agree so fully in their ana- 

 tomical details as to leave no doubt of their identity. 



But as Bassett-Smith pointed out in 1899 they belong to the 

 genus EcMhrogaleus rather than Dinematura. The male (and inci- 

 dentally the female also) corresponds in every essential detail with 

 the types established for the genus EcMhrogaleus, and thus the 

 species will stand as the New Zealand representative of that genus,, 



o The figures as published by Hesse were numbered incorrectly (see p. 396); figs. 4 

 and 6 should be interchanged, as also figs. 17 and 23. 



