Sliiilii>s oil iii^iiiiir Oslra(;ods 593 



l)v .1. Lubbock, i860. (J. (). Sahs was mistaken about the genus Halocypris; this writer inc luded 

 in this genus not only the species placed in it by J. I). Dana hut also (Umchopcia 

 ohtusata G. O. S\iis and C. curta J. Lubbock [=^ C. Clausii ((i. O. Sai!S)|, two forms wliich do 

 not belong here at all; cf. also (i. O. Sars 1890, p, 53. (!. S. Bkady, 1880 again combined these 

 forms in one genus, Conckoecia, as he could not find in J. 1). J)A\A's descriptions ,,anv differences 

 sufficient, in my opinion, to form grounds of generic distinction". Th. Scott, 1894, used the 

 generic name Halucypris for all the species of this group that were investigated bv him. The 

 difference between these two genera had. iKtwever, already been pretty well settled in ('. Claus's 

 worksj 1874 a and I). 



(t. (). Saks, 1865, employed the same classification as J. D. Dana, but with the difference 

 that the latter investigator's family HaJocyfridae was denoted as the sub-order Myodoc.apa 

 and the sub-families Cypridininac and IhUocyprinae as the families Cypridimdae and ConcJioc- 

 c.iadae; cf. p. 155 above. The Halo c y p r i d s are denoted by all other writers as a family; 

 most of them use the name Halocypridae; cf. p. 555 above. 



C. Olaus, 1874 a, established a new genus Halocypria and (t. W. MOller 1890 a another, 

 Euconchoecia, but apart from this these writers did not undertake any further division of tliis 

 group in the works mentioned. 



in C. Claus's work of 1890 we find the folhnving far-reaching classification of this group: 



Conchoecia J. I). Dana. 

 Paraconchoecia n. g. 

 Conchoecetta n. g. 

 ('Onchoecilla n. g. 

 Conchoecissn n. g. 

 Pseudomnchoccia n. g. 

 Mikroconclioecia n. g. 



Sub-family ( Halorypris J. D. DANA. 

 Halocyprinae \ Haldcypria ('. C'laus. 



This author uses the same classification in his following works (1891 a and 1894). His 

 example was followed by several investigators: (J. S. BRADY and A. M. NORMAX, 1896, G. 8. 

 Brady. 1897, 1902 a, 1903, 1907, P. T. Cleve, 1900, 1905. A. M. Norman, 1905 and A. ScOTT. 

 1905. (The last-mentioned writer only partly, as he denotes Mikroconchoecia as Conchoecia). 



G. \V. MuiJ.ER in his great Naples monograph, 1894, established a new genus of this 

 group, Archiconchoecia. This writer strongly opposed G. GUAUS's classification just mentioned. 

 On p. 223 of the work just referred to he pointed out, first, that of the seven genera into which 

 C. Cl.\us divided the genus Conchoecia no less than five were represented only by a single species 

 and, secondly, that the differences that exist between these genera are rather slight. With 

 regard to the classification of the sub-families Conchoecinae and Halocyprinae this author writes: 

 ..Da beide Formen" (Halocypris ;iiid Halocypria) „naher mit einander verwandt sind als niit 

 Euconchoecia oder Archiconchoecia, oder als diese unter einander, so wiirde sich als Gonse(jueuz 

 ergeben. daB wir fiir diese beiden (lurch je 1 Art vertretenen Gattunuen je eine besondere Familie 



Sub-family 

 ('onchoecinae 



