62 



In the first pleopods the peduncle is fringed witli a dozen; 

 hooked spines. The male stilet of the second pair is produced 

 considerably beyond the rami. None of the rami show any trans- 

 verse suture. 



Locality: — Specimens were taken at three stations — Cape St- 

 Blaize ^ . ■' 



W. ii^ miles, 27 fathoms, fine sand; and Cape St. Blaize N-W^ 

 3-i miles, 33 fathoms^ mud. 



Miss H. Richardson's genus Colidotea is dis'fcinguished from 

 Synidotea by having* only two joints to the palp of the maxillipeds, 

 and the side-plates distinct and well-detvelopied in the last thfee 

 segments of the perseon. The first joint of the maxilliped palp 

 in S. hirtipes is so faintly marked that in this respect it may be 

 regarded as a link between the two genera. On the other hand,, 

 the side-plates of the perseon segments are scarcely discernible. 



In his key to the species of Synidotea, Dr. Benedict was unable 

 to include 6\ hirtipes (Milne-Edwards) and the var, laevidorsalis^ 

 (Miers), a larger, narrower form from Japan, neither of which 

 he had seen. But he incidentally recognizes tha'tj they belong to- 

 the first of the two sections into whiqh he divides the genus. 

 Within this section 5- hirtipes makes the neares^t approach to 5"- 

 laiicauda, Benedict, of which Dr. Benedict remarks that " the 

 valves of the operculum are diagonally crossed by a curved line." 

 As already noticed, in S. /m'/i/>f.y the valves of the; opercular 

 uropods are crossed by two such lines. No one observing one of 

 them could well fail to notice the other, so that this 

 may be taken as a distinctive mark separating S^ 

 hirtipes from S laiicauda, which is also a broader form. 

 Miers, it is true, does not make any reference to the second' 

 line in S. htriipcs, but possibly it might not attract 

 attention in the dried specimens which he examined. In the var, 

 laevidorsalis he figures the opercular valve with only one line 

 which points to the conclusion that this Japanese form is- 

 specifically distinct. 



Idotea indica, Milne-Edwards- 



1840. l^otea Indica, Milne-Edwards, Hist. Nat. des Crustace*,. 



vol. 3, p. 131. 

 1843. ? Idotea LatreiUii, Gucrin-Meneville, Iconographie du 



Regne Animal, Crustaces, p. 32. 

 1881. Idotea indica, Miers, Journ. Linn. Soc. London, vol. 16, p. 



50, pi. 2, figs. 4, 5. ■ 



This species bears a rather close general resemblance to Idotea 

 emarginata, Fabricius, but is distinguishable from it by the rather 

 sinuous and less convergent sides of the telsonic segment, and by 

 the side-plates of the perseon. Miers says that these latter parts- 

 are " small, in the second segment occupying-, in a lateral view^ 



