172 



segment of about the same size as the preceding one. Caudal rami comparatively 

 short, but rather broad and transversely truncated at the end, being scarcely 

 at all divergent; seta of outer edge attached near the end; apical setae well 

 developed and not very unequal in length. Anterior antennae scarcely 

 exceeding half the length of the cephalic segment, and distinguished by the 

 great length of some of the setae clothing them; 2nd joint comparatively 

 shorter and thicker than in the other species; last joint very small. Posterior 

 antennae rather feeble in structure, though not much shorter than the anterior; 

 2nd joint not attaining the length of the outer 2 combined, and finely ciliated 

 on the inner edge; apical claws very slender and not much stronger than the 

 accompanying setae, the outermost being the longest. Maxillae agreeing in 

 structure with those in the type species. Anterior maxillipeds also rather 

 similar. Posterior maxillipeds however less strong, with the propodal joint 

 the longest and somewhat curved at the base, carrying inside beyond the 

 middle a very long recurved plumose seta; dactylar joint conical in form. The 

 3 anterior pairs of natatory legs with the rami rather coarse and of about equal 

 length. 4th pair with the outer ramus much more slender than in the pre- 

 ceding pairs and, as usual, wanting one of the spines on the terminal joint; 

 inner ramus somewhat exceeding the length of the first 2 joints of the outer 

 combined, and rather broader, with a small, but distinct notch outside a little 

 in front of the middle; apical spines rather thin and nearly equal-sized, or the 

 outer one a little longer than the inner. Last pair of legs, as in the other 

 species, replaced on each side by a rather strong posteriorly-pointing spine 

 and 2 small setae. 



Colour not yet ascertained. 



Length of the specimen examined about 1 mm. 



Remarks. The above-described form agrees on the whole pretty well 

 with the description and figures given by Canu of his species, and I cannot 

 therefore doubt the identity of the two. It is an easily recognisable species, being 

 especially distinguished by the peculiar compressed form of the anterior division of 

 the body, making it rather difficult to get a dorsal view of the animal. In some of 

 the structural details also it exhibits well-marked differences from the other species. 



Occurrence. Only a solitary female specimen of this form has as yet 

 come under my notice. It was found, some years ago, at Risor, south coast 

 of Norway, being selected from some dredged material obtained from a depth 

 of about 20 fathoms. Canu has stated the occurrence of this species as a 

 parasite on the well-known Spatangoid, Echinocardium cordatum. 



Distribution. Coast of France (Canu). 



