96 
its palmar margin thin, moderately oblique, and fringed with 
a few small hairs. 
The second peraeopods are very slender and short, the third 
joint the longest, the fifth a little longer than the trunk of 
the sixth, the latter being somewhat shorter than thumb or 
finger, each of which is slender, carrying seven slender spine; on 
the inner margin and two sete on the outer. They meet 
only at the tips, each having an unguis, that of the thumb or 
fixed finger being considerably the larger. Smith gives no 
details as to this curious chela, and Bate’s only intelligible 
figure of it refers to his P. profundus, in which the ungues 
appear to be almost exactly equal, although the juncture-line 
between the movable finger and its nail is omitted. 
The long slender third peraeopods have the sixth and seventh 
joints together nearly as long as the fifth joint, in accord with 
Smith’s account. The stiletto-like appearance of the finger 
is not sustained under high magnification, the apex being 
pellucid and not acute. The fourth and fifth pairs are com- 
paratively robust, with strong setose fringing, the fourth 
joint the longest, but not much longer than the sixth (at least 
in the fourth pair, in the fifth the terminal joints were missing). 
The finger (in the fourth pair) is quite smooth, narrowly boat- 
shaped, the true apex being perhaps acute, but both here 
and in the preceding pair sheltered by a pellucid cap, after a 
fashion found in some of the Amphipods. 
Professor Smith supposed his specimen to be a female, 
possibly immature, and describes the first pleopod as having 
its inner ramus about as long as the peduncle, ‘linear, and 
the margins not ciliated,” the outer ramus “ narrow-ovate, 
considerably longer than the inner, and of the usual structure.”’ 
The specimen here described agrees fairly with these relative 
dimensions, but differs in having the inner ramus strongly 
fringed with plumose sete on both margins. The second 
pleopod in the American description has the inner ramus “‘ a 
little shorter and much narrower than the outer, and has a 
single stylet two-fifths as long as itself arising from the inner 
margin near the base.’ This coupling process or retinaculum 
is figured by Smith as naked, whereas in the South African 
specimen it is fringed with plumose sete. Here too, the inner 
ramus is not at all shorter than the outer. The apical hooks 
in two rows, are about a dozen in number, seemingly agreeing 
closely in shape with those figured by Professor H. Couti¢re* 
for Alpheus strenuus, Dana. 

* Les Alpheidae, p. 303, fig. 373, 1899. 
