350 Miscellaneous, 



Revision of Amphipoda . 

 By the Kev. Thomas li. 11. Stebbi>^g, M.A., F.E.S. 



In the Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist, for March 1899, at p. 241, a new 

 goims was defined for the reception of CoropJiiian crcavatum, 

 Thomson, but, b}- inadvertence, the name of the genus was omitted. 

 It is Paravoroplninn. On p. 239, 1. 15, for Darivinii (Eate) should 

 be read variegatas^ Leach. 



This opportunity may be taken for announcing some other 

 changes which 1 consider necessary in the nomenclature of the 

 Amphijioda. Micrudetdopus chelifer, Haswell, I propose to call 

 Microdcutopus JIasivelli, and to transfer his JSlicrodeutopus australis 

 to the genus Lcmhoides ; the Axdonoe lonrfidigitans of Bonnier to 

 the genus Lemhos : Ma'roides Thomp>soni, Wallier, Mcera crassipe/^, 

 Haswell, Mara dentifera, Haswell, Mm-a Chiltoni, G. ^\. Thomsoi), 

 Paranania lonrjimanKS, (^\\i\io\'\, and Podoceroptsis pahnata, Stebbing 

 and Eobertson, all to the genus Gammaropsis. Leptodieirus pilosu^,, 

 Delia Valle, seems to be distinct from the species so-named by 

 Zaddach, and may be distinguished as Lcjdocheirus DeUavrdlei. 

 Biancolina alr/icoht, Delia Valle, appears to be identical with 

 AmjdtitJioe minicvhis, and will become Biancolina cunicvlvs. Mara 

 IJasweUi, G. M. Thomson, should, 1 think, be placed in Haswell's 

 genus Wyvillea, a genus about which, however, more precise infor- 

 mation is desirable. Podocerus dtntex, Czerniavski, may, as Jassa 

 dtntex, include in its synonymy Podocerus Herdmani, Walker, and 

 Podocerus odontonyx, Sars. The SipJionoecetes typicus described 

 by Delia Valle does not suit well with Kroyer's species, and deserves 

 the independent title of SipJionoecetes Dellavalhi. 



Dates of Charles d'Orhignyh ' Dictionnaire Uuiversel d''Histoire 

 Naturelle,^ 1839-1849. By C. Davies Sheebokn and T. S. Palmer. 



Careful collation of five copies of this ' Dictionnaire ' shows that with 

 the exception of volume i. there was only one composition — that is 

 to say, if we take p. 100, for instance, the last word in every copy of 

 every volume is identical. There was are-composition of volume i., for 

 one of us has examined an original copy in the U.S. Nat. Museum which 

 differs in that the " Discours" is paged in roman (i-ccxl) and p. 100 

 terminates with " qui est," two words towards the end of the article 

 " Acrodou." The other four copies of vol. i. which have been 

 examined by us are themselves alike, but differ in that they have a 

 new printer, some changes in authors, and a slightly difierent title- 

 page. It is quite possible that there were reprints of some of the 

 other volumes as they were exhausted, but there is nothing to 

 show, so far us our researches go, that any re-setting of the type 

 took place in any volume but volume i. 



Of the five sets examined, that of the U.S. Nat. Museum is the 

 most valuable, as, with the exception of vol. ii., it is apparently an 

 orio-inal issue. It belonged to Professor S. Y. Baird. The Zoolo- 

 gical Society's copy shows what are probable reissues of the first 

 five volumes. 



