130 Rev. A. M. Norman’s Notes on British Amphipoda. 
jected in tooth-like form; from the concavity spring three 
spines, of which the central is the longest. 
The female is very like the same sex of C. Sundevalli ; 
but the transverse rows of sete of the wrist of second gnatho- 
pod (Pl. XI. fig. 11) appear to want the hamate character so 
conspicuous in the adult and more or less evident in the 
young of the allied species. 
Hab. Off Holy Island, on the Northumberland coast, 
1864 * (A. MW. N.); off coast of Aberdeen (the late Mr. R. 
Dawson); off Farland Point, Isle of Cumbrae, 20 fath. 
(A. ML. N. and D. Robertson, 1888) : Mus. Norm. 
Distribution. Floré, Norway, 45-70 fath. (A. M. N.): 
Mus. Norm.  Bohuslin, Sweden (Bruzelius); Norway, at 
Mandal (Boeck) ; Christiansund (Diiben) ; Arcachon, France, 
M. Dolfuss, Luc-sur-Mer, I Topsent, and Croisic (Chev- 
reauc). 
2. Cheirocratus Sundevalli (Rathke). 
(Pl. XI. figs. 9, 10, and Pl. XII. figs. 1-3.) 
1843. Gammarus SLA Rathke, Beitrage zur Fauna Norwegens, 
p- 65, pl. iii. fig. 2, gd. 
1853. Gammarus Sundevalli, Lilljeborg, Kongl. Vet-Akad. Handl. 
. 454, 
1859. Gammarus Sundevalli, Bruzelius, Skand. Amphip. Gamm. p. 57. 
1862. Gammarus Sundevalli, Bate, Cat. Amphip. Crust. Brit. Mus. 
p. 213, pl. xxxviil. fig. 1, ¢. 
1862. Protomedeia W "hitel, id. ibid. p. 169, pl. xxxi. fig. 3, 2. 
1862. Liljeborgia shetlandica, Bate & Westw. Brit. Sessile- -eyed Crust. 
vol. i. p. 206, 3. 
1862, Protomedeia White?, iid. ibid. p. 300, 2. 
1868. Protomedeia (?) White’, Norman, Last Report Dredging Shetland 
Isles, Brit. Assoc. Rep. p. 288, 9& d. 
1870. Chetrocratus Sundevalli, A. Boeck, Crust. Amphip. bor. et arct. 
133. 
1876, Chetrocratus Sundevalli, A. Boeck, De Skand. og Arkt. Amphip. 
p. 396, pl. xxiv. fig. 2,3 92. 
1874. Liljeborgia Normannt, Stebbing, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 4, 
vol. xiv. p. 10, pl. i. fig. la-e, 3. 
1876. Liljeborgia Normanni, id. ibid. vol. xvii. p. 76, pl. v. fig. 4, 3. 
1880. Cheirocratus brevicornis, Hoek, Carcinologisches (Tijdschr. d. Ned. 
Dierk. Vereen. vol. iv.), p. 142, pl. x. figs. 10-13, 3. 
1884. Cheirocratus brevicornis, Blanc, Die Amphipoden der Kieler 
Bucht, p. 72, pl. viii. figs. 76, 77, 6 9. 
Great confusion has existed respecting this species. This 
confusion has arisen from three causes :—first, the separation 
of the sexes ; secondly, the insufficiency of the earlier figures 
* Mr. Robertson, in his ‘Contrib. to Cat. of Amphipoda and Isopoda of 
the Firth of Clyde,’ has by an error thought that the Holy Island off 
which I took this species was the island so “named in the Firth of Clyde. 
