of the " Genus " Teueus. 500 



species not thus characterized he applied the name Para- 

 peneus. In this paper the author objected to the action of 

 Miers and Kingsley in himping his genus Xiphopeneus (18G9) 

 with Peneus, and emphasized the distinctive characters of 

 Xiphopeneus. 



In 1891 Wood-Mason, in these 'Annals' (ser. 6. vol. viii. 

 p. 271), pointed out that certain Parapenei differed fi'om the 

 type species {Parapeneus membranaceus, Ilisso,= P. longi- 

 rostris, Lucas) in not possessing the characteristic sutures o£ 

 the carapace and in having a filamentous vestige of an 

 anterior arthrobranch on the penultimate thoracic appendage. 

 To these forms he gave the name Metapeneus. 



Wood- Mason also recognized that Peneus styliferus, Edw., 

 though it possesses the carapacial sutures which are a marked 

 feature of Parapeneus membranaceus, Risso, is unlike that 

 species in having curved lamellar exopodites on all the 

 thoracic legs. He therefore separated P. styliferus and gave 

 it the MS. name Parapeneopsis, probably because P. styliferus 

 happens to have the long antennular flagella which Spence 

 Bate had chosen as the distinctive mark of Peneopsis. 

 Unfortunately for the aptness of the name Parapeneopsis, 

 several of the species which must be transferred to this 

 section or genus have short antennular flagella. 



In 1896 de Man (' Zoologischer Anzeiger/ p. Ill) published 

 a description of a new Peneid, whi(;h, from the peculiar size 

 and length of the first pair of chelipeds of the male, he made 

 the t3^[)e of a distinct genus, Heteropeneus. The observations 

 of Nobili (Boll. Mus. Torino, 1903, no. 455) seem to show 

 that the difference between Heteropeneus and Peneus is, 

 perhaps, rather less than the difference between the latter 

 genus and Parapeneus, Metapeneus, &c. ; so that Heteropeneus 

 should be taken into the maniple Peneus. 



In 1901, in 'A Catalogue of Indian Deep-sea Crustacea/ 

 p. 15, I suggested that P. curvirostris, Stimpson {=P. ancho- 

 ralis, Spence Bate), should be detached from the genus 

 Parapeneus, where it had been placed by other authors, and 

 should be made the type of a new subgenus or genus 

 Trachijpeneus. 



In the present paper all the sections — genera or subgenera 

 ■ — into which the old Fabrician genus has gradually become 

 split are tabulated and briefly defined, and an attempt is 

 made to sift all the species that have been described under 

 the name Peneus and to distribute them in their proper 

 sections. It is but an attempt, because to allocate the 

 species with confidence requires exact information regarding 

 the grooves and sutures of the carapace, the presence or 



