studies oil maniir Ostracods 



1!)7 



.^p 



rid I n ode 



Mono 



'pia 



Dolor 



Mocrocupridina 



Cijpridina 



(sensu mec 

 ft s sir) 



Siphonosfra 



Codonocera 



As has beeii puiutetl (lut al)uve, Monopia seems in a way to occupy a classificatory position 

 intermediate between Vargula and Cypridinodes, the last-mentioned of which is the most 

 aberrant type of these units. In spite of this, as is seen above, I have considered 

 it most convenient to distinguish the first-mentioned and the last-mentioned, of these 

 tiiree units from all the others as two sub-genera of a specific genus Monopia. — It 

 )nay be mentioned in passing that C. Claims, 1873, p. 223 put forward the assumption that 

 Monopia flaveola might be rather closely related 

 to J. D. Dana's species Cypridina punctata 

 (J. D. Dana, 1852, pi. 91, fig. 2). 



The sub-genus Doloria, on account of 

 the primitive type of the endopodite of 

 its male second antenna, seems to occupy 

 a certain exceptional position not only t( 



Vargula, Macrocypridina, Cypridina (s. str., 



s. meo) and Siphonostra, but also to Monopia 



and Cypridinodes. It seems to me rather prob- 

 able that it separated fi-om the others before 



the differentiation of Monopia-Cypridinodes. 



In spite of this I have deemed it proper to 



join it to the foiu' first- mentioned of these 



units on account of the great agreement that 



it shows with these in all the other characters; 



as is pointed out above, they are all in this 



treatise classified as sub-genera of one and the 



same genu-: Cypridina. 



The result of this investigation, which 



— as has been pointed out above — merely on 



account of the uncertainty and incompleteness 



of the material can by no means be considered 



as certain, may be shown graphically in some- 

 thing like the following maimer, fig. XXV. 



With regard to the mutual relations of tli(> different species within the genera it is, of 



course, even more difficult to make any statement. — Even in those genera in which the 



majority of the species have been described by G. W. MOller, undoubtedly our foremost 



(Xstracod investigator, our knowledge of the species is rather limited on account of the 



deficiencies of the diagnoses. In the present work I have accoi'dingly almost entirely 



retrained from drawing conclusions on this point. 



Giaantocijp 



Crossophorus 



Ki-. XW. 



Primitive Cypndinina- 



rill' hypulliL'tiral pudigix't 

 r.iniily Ctijiridiiiiiiac. 



ul' llir suli 



I'ocili'in iif ihr 

 sjircii'!'. 



Oecology of reproduction: — With regard to the phenomena of the oecology of repio- 

 duction in this sub-family nothing or practically nothing certain is known, nor can I contribute 

 much towards the solution of this problem. 



