60 



300 fathoms. As could be inferred from the structure of the antennae, the 

 animal is quite devoid of swimming power, being only enabled to crawl slowly 

 on the bottom, at times burrying itself more or less deeply within the loose 

 mud. Male specimens are rather seldom to be found and may easily escape atten- 

 tion, as they do not differ in the shape of the shell from young female specimens. 



Distribution. Shetland Isles (Baird). 



Fossil in posttertiary deposits of Calabria. 



Gen. 5. Macrocypria, G. O. Sars, n. 



Generic Characters. Shell very narrow and elongated, acutely producec 

 both in front and behind, with the marginal zone of the valves highly chi- 

 tinised. Eye absent. Both pairs of antennae much more slender than in the 

 preceding genus, but, as in it, unadapted for swimming. Oral parts of nearly 

 same structure as in that genus. Maxillipeds with the palps in female less 

 robust, scarcely exceeding the basal part in length and distinctly 4-articulate. 

 Anterior legs very much elongated, with the terminal joint comparatively 

 small and tipped with a single exceedingly long and slender claw accompanied 

 by 2 small bristles. Posterior legs with the 2 apical setae very small, recurved 

 spine however well developed. Caudal rami movably articulated to the body, 

 and very unlike those in Macrocypris, being conspicuously asymmetrical, left 

 ramus much smaller than the right, which is produced in the shape of a 

 highly chitinised mucroniform piece without any armature whatever. Ejaculatory 

 tubes and their eferent ducts of essentially same structure as in Macrocypris. 

 Copulative appendages, however, rather dissimilar, not being lamellar, but oi 

 very compact structure, and clavate in shape. A pair of scopiform processes 

 present in male, issuing from the ventral face of the body between the bases 

 of the posterior legs. 



Remarks. This new genus is established, to include a species formerly 

 referred by the present author to the genus Macrocypris. On a closer exami- 

 nation I have however found this species to differ in some respects so deci- 

 dedly from the type of that genus that I now am of opinion that it more properly 

 ought to be separated generically. The generic name here proposed alludej; 

 to the near relationship of this genus to Macrocypris. 



