Sluilir-; (111 inariiir Oslracoils 4.'5.'5 



IV] 



M a 11 tl i b 1 e: — The dorsal point of the endite on tlie first protopodite joint is called ,,tlu' 

 scythe-shaped process", the ventral point the ,, rod-shaped process". The conic'al process situated 

 |)i()xinio-ventero-medially on the second protopodite joint (,,Riickwarts gerichteter Fortsatz", 

 a W. MOLLER, 1894, explanation of pi. 4, fig. 44, but not p. 203) is called „the backward 

 pointing process". 



Maxilla: — The dense series of bristles situated latero-ventrally along the proto- 

 podite is called ,,the baleen", the single bristle ,,the baleen bristle". 



Fifth limb: — The narrow tongue-shaped organ formed by the protopodite and the 

 two proximal endopodite joints is called ,,the comb", its ventral bristh^s ,,the comb bristles". 



Historical: — The first description of a species belonging to this family that is found in '''''■<' descripiinn of 

 literature is that of A. Philippi in „A r c h i v f U r N a t u r g e s c h i c h t e", 1840, pp. 186 to ""' f""'' ''P''""'^"- 

 188. The species in question was pronounced by Philippi to be a type of a new genus, Asterope, 

 ,,der Ostracopode n", for he found that not only the shell, but .,auch das Thier sowohl 

 von Cypris and Cytherina''^ (= Cythere, part.) ,,als auch von Gypridina Milne-Edwards . . . 

 so bedeutend verschieden ist, daB es nothwendig ein eigenes Genus bilden muB". Tiie new genus 

 would differ from the genus Cypridina principally ,,1. durch den Einschnitt der Scliale*, 2. indem 

 nur zwei Paar blattartiger FiiBe vorhanden sind, 3. indem der Schwanz einfach ist (bei Cypridina 

 besteht er aus zwei Lamellen)". Thus entirely mistakes! Although the description is very 

 incomplete and consists principally of mistakes, there can scarcely be any real doubt that the 

 species in question — A. elliptica — is really very closely related to and belongs to the same 

 genus as the forms that are included in the genus Asterope in the 2iresent work. 



During the first three decades after 1840, however, Philippi's new name for the genus did ^'"' ^'''""■' ■^"'''''"i"' 

 not gain recognition. The writers who dealt with forms belonging to this genus during this time heginmn^. 



referred them to other more or less closely related genera that had been previously described. Thus 

 H. NiCOLET (Gay, 1849, p. 294) describes a species that certainly belongs here under the name 

 of Cypris himaculata; J. D. Dana's Cypridina olivacea, 1849, p. 51 can — on account of the 

 sha])e of the shell and the wreath of hairs round the back part of the shell — be referred to this 

 genus, though with some doubt.** E. Grube, 1859, also refers forms belonging here to the genus 

 Cypridina, and A. M. Norman, who adopts the generic name Asterope in his later works, in 1861 

 describes one of these species under the name of Cypridina teres, and later on, 1867, p. 198, 

 includes it in the genus Bradycinetus {= Philomedes). None of these writers gives any reasons 

 for this method of procedure of theirs. W. Bairh, who consistently refers these forms to the 

 genus Cypridina in all his works upon them, 1847, 1850 a and 1850 c, explains this, 1847, p. 21 

 by the fact that in dissecting two species, ,, which I can only refer to the genus Cypridina", 

 namely C. (= Philomedes) Macandrei and C. (= Cyclasteropel) Adamsi, he found that these 



* Owing lo a.i ovt.'i-.-;ighl Milnb liDWAiiDs, 1840, described tiie genus Cypridina without any rostral incisur. 

 ** G. S. Brady was the first lo put forward the assumption thai this species miglit be included in the genus 

 Aslerope (1880, p. 154). This assumption was not accompanied, however, by any reasons; Brady only writes ,,Asteropr? 

 n/^Vacea Dana". Inthe same place this author writes Cypridina me.dilerranca, O. Costa, 1845 as „Asterope? medilerrnnea". 

 This view is of course incorrect; it was abandoned in G. S. Rrady's later work and was never adopted by other writers. 

 ' 'ipridina olivacea was vcterred to Philnmedps by G. S. RiiAnY in ISfiS. 



ZooIoK. bidrag, Uppsala. Suppl.-Ld. I. 55 



