studies (111 iiiarin' Ostracods 153 



The Hist time in literature that we come across the name Ostracoda, whicli is nowadays 

 practically quite the accepted name for this group, is in E^ A. I^atkeille's work ,,H i s t o i r o 

 naturelle des Crustaces et des Insect s", 1802. The ,,ordre quatrieme" 

 of Entomostraca, under which the author includes the genera Lijnceus, Daphnia, Ci/priv anti 

 Cy there, thus both Ostracods in the modern sense and Cladocera, is called Ostrachoda in 

 this work (p. 17). The same classification is employed in this writer's later works (1806 and 

 1810); the name is written, however, somewhat differently: Ostracoda (pp. 17 and 89), thus 

 with the now generally accepted spelling. In his work of 1829 this author divides .,le premier 

 ordre des Entomostraces", Branchiopoda, into two branches, LopJiyropa and Phyllopa. 

 Lophyropa is divided (p. 151) into three divisions: Carcinoida, Ostracoda and Cladocera. Of these 

 three groups Ostracoda includes two genera: Cythere and Cypris; Cladocera consists of three 

 genera Polyphemus, Daphnia and Lynceus. In other words this author thus follows 

 H. E. Straus's example in differentiating between Daphnia etc. and Cythere and Cypris but 

 rejects his nomenclature. He writes Ostrapoda Stiiaus as a synonym for Ostracoda LATli., 

 but this is clearly not so. In his work ,,C ours d'E n t o m o 1 o g i e", 1831, this author is, 

 however, more consistent; in it he employs (p. 429) the name Ostrapoda Straus for the group 

 formed by the genera Cythere and Cypris. A. G. Deswarest (1825) follows H. E. Straus 

 consistently. — In passing it may be mentioned that A. Philippi, 1840, p. 186, uses a variant 

 of H. E. Straus's term, namely Ostracopoda. — The name Ostrapoda is obviously 

 the right one for this group, but it has been so completely forgotten, the name 

 Ostracoda has come into use in such a great number of works and has been so completely 

 admitted into scientific literature that it would be quite impractical at this late date to 

 adopt the older name again, especially as the rules of nomenclature that are now followed 

 do not make it absolutely necessary to use the principle of priority in this case. 

 Accordingly in the present treatise I have retained the name Ostracoda, 

 and I nuist take the risk of doing the inventor of the name Ostrapoda what T. ]?. R. 

 Stebi!I\g in his work published in 1910 — in which the name Ostrapoda is again used --- calls 

 on p. 495 ,,a great injustice". 



From the middle of the 19th century the investigation of Ostracods may be said Authors uf the later 

 to begin a new epoch. This is especiallv the case with regard to the studv of the salt-water P'"i of ihc mh cen- 

 representatives, i. e. that part of this group to which the present work is devoted. ««<«/■</. 



In the following portion of this historical resume attention will be paid practically 

 exclusively to progress in the study of the salt-water Ostracods. 



While up to 1840 practically all investigations were concerned exclusively with fresh- 

 water forms and only a few investigators such as 0. F. Ml'LLER, G. de RlMi.LE, H. Mll.NE- 

 Edwards and A. Phiuippi, the three latter only cursorily, were directly occupied with tiie 

 study of salt-water forms, towards the middle of the 19th century there appeared a number 

 of scientists with comprehensive and illuminating works on the sea-0 s t r a c o d s, and after 

 interest was once seriously roused, investigation has continually been directed to them, even 

 though it must be said that this study, compared with the very intensive work on many other 

 animal groups during the same time, has always been rather badly treated. 



Zoolog. bidrag, Uijpjahi. 5uppl>Bd. 1. -'' 



