226 On the ' Challenger * Eryonidea. 



Otherwise there are a number of well-marked differences 

 between the two specimens. The " fur " on the carapace is 

 much denser in the cotype, which also carries a definite row 

 of spines along the branchial ridge, wanting in the type. 

 The greatest difference is, however, found in the outline of the 

 front, the type resembling to a certain degree the figure given 

 by Bate (xv. 5, $ ). But in tlie cotype the orbits are wide 

 and open in comparison to the narrow notches found in the 

 type. They are angular and embrace an angle of about 

 90 degrees. The distance between the intra-orbital spine and 

 the antero-lateral is about equal to the distance between the 

 two intra-orbital spines. In the type the last-named distance 

 is bj' much the greater. 



On the whole, I think it scarcely justified to refer both 

 specimens to one species ; the cotype ought to be made the 

 type of a separate species, for which I take the liberty to 

 propose the name 



Polycheles chilensis, sp. n. 



Pentacheles euthrix, Willemoes-Suhm. 

 Polycheles euthrix, de Man, I. c. 



Four specimens are mentioned in Bate's text. Only two 

 are preserved to this day, one from Stat. 170 and one from 

 Stat. 173. They agree quite well also in matter of median 

 ridge-armature, which, however, is wrongly represented both 

 in tiie text and in the figures. It may be given thus: — 



2::.1...1..2:::1:::::C2::::::::::::::::::::^. 



The lateral edge is armed with 9 + 4-1-13 spines. The 

 gastral area carries only one spine, and there are no spines 

 on the branchial region. 



Polycheles haccala. Bate. 



The six specimens, all taken at Stat. 173, were of the 

 following sizes : — 



p^ Total length Length of cara- Length in % of o 



in mm. pace in mm. carapace. ^^' 



1.. 68 29 235 Male. 



2.. 50 22 227 „ 



3.. 43 19 227 „ 



4.. 72 30 <. 240 Female. 



5.. 41 18 227 



6.. 41 18 227 



