60 Rev. A. M. Norman on Crustacea Cumacea. 
wliicli have a backward direction. The pleon has small spines 
(in both sexes) on the ventral surface of the fourth, fifth, and 
sixth segments, but chiefly on the fifth. Upper antennce 
reaching beyond the rostrum by the last very long joint of the 
peduncle; flagellum 3-jointed, as long as the last joint of the 
peduncle ; shorter flagellum small, not longer than the first 
joint of the longer flagellum. The first feet have the three 
terminal joints subequal; first joint of all the legs, and even 
the basai joint of their palps, spinose; last three legs very 
robust. Telson with about fourteen spines on each side. 
Uropods with twenty-five lateral spines on the peduncle ; inner 
branch with 1st joint bearing eleven spines on the inner 
margin, 2nd three, 3rd three and terminal spine; outer branch 
having about fifteen cilia on the exterior margin. Length 11 
millims. 
Immature male. Length 9 millims. Like $ in character of 
carapace, pereion, pleon, legs, &c.; telson with ten lateral 
spines ; uropods having their peduncle equal in length to the 
telson and bearing eighteen spines on the inner margin; inner 
branch having 1st joint furnished with eight spines, 2nd with 
four, 3rd with three and terminal spine. 
Dredged during the ‘Porcupine’ Expedition of 1869, in 
Lough Swilly, co. Donegal, in 15 fathoms. 
I have named this species after my friend Professor G. S. 
Brady, who has added so much to our knowlege of the Ento- 
mostraca of our seas. 
12. Diastylis Icevis , Norman. 
1869. Diastylis Icevis , Norman, Last Report Shetland Dredging, Brit. 
Assoc. Report, 1868 (1869), p. 270. 
Professor Sars has given the above as a synonym of D. 
tumida , Lilljeborg. It certainly comes very near it, but is, I 
think, distinct. At the time I drew up the description of D. 
Icevis I had by my side (a) specimens of D. tumida received 
from Professor Lov^n, ( b ) Sars’s description of that species. 
In describing my species, in order to draw attention to the 
strong points of resemblance, I adopted almost the very words 
of Sars’s description wherever they were applicable. I have 
now also by me specimens received from the Professor as 
Diastylis tumida. The points of distinction seem to be as 
follows :—1st, the carapace of Icevis is much more elongated 
and much less deep ; 2nd, the telson is of a different form ; in 
D. Icevis the part posterior to the anal aperture is always 
markedly longer than the basal portion, whereas in D. tumida 
it is usually much shorter, never apparently longer ; 3rd, in the 
much more numerous spines of telson and uropods in D. Icevis. 
