CRUSTACEA MALACOSTRACA. II. „^ 



three-fourths of its length; the inner side of the hand (fig. ah) with a subdistal, transverse row of 

 pecnhar light but broad setae. 



Second pair of thoracic legs (fig. 21) thinner than in the female, with the sixth joint scarcely 

 half as long again as the fourth and as long as seventh with claw. Three posterior pairs of legs 

 (fig. 2k) with sixth joint somewhat longer than the fifth and slightly shorter than the seventh, which 

 is about two and a half times as long as the claw. 



Sixth abdominal segment (fig. 2I) posteriorly produced into a small, rounded tip. — Endopod 

 of the uropods somewhat longer than the exopod, two-jointed, with the first joint a little longer and 

 considerably thicker than the second, before the middle on the upper half of the outer side with some 

 fine hairs placed in a transverse row. 



Length of the specimen 1.3""". 



Remarks. L. Haiiseiii is .sharply separated from the three preceding species by the more 

 oblong chelae without any serration on the anterior margin of hand or finger; from L. longircmis 

 Lilljeborg and /.. h/i-ruiis n. sp. it is easil\- distinguished b>- the much longer "claw" (seventh joint 

 plus claw) on second and third pairs of legs. As to the male described, which is easily seen to belong 

 to Leptognafbiii. I am sure that it belongs to the female, because it has been taken together with a 

 large number of females and immature males and cannot belong to an\- other species known from 

 West Greenland excepting L. Sarsii and L. gracilis, but no female of any of these species has been 

 taken at Ameralik, and the male described by Sars as belonging to his L. Inngireinis probably belongs 

 to L. Sarsii and differs widely in some features. 



Then the determination of the present species. In the paper on the marine Malacostraca of 

 West Greenland (1887) I mentioned a specimen which did not agree with L. longiremis as interpreted 

 and figured by Sars in the Norwegian North-Atlantic Expedition, because the chelae had no serration; 

 I named it ''1 Leptognaf/iia loiigireviis Lilljeborg" and added figures of antenna, chela and uropod. 

 According to these figures the specimen (which belongs to the Riks Museum in Stockholm) is cer- 

 tainh- identical with the species described here as L. Haiiscni Vanh. Later \'anh6ffen captured several 

 specimens of a species in Karajok Fjord (not very far from Kekertak); he ft)uud that his females 

 agreed with my remarks and figures and finding no positive facts which made it necessary to refer 

 the form to the real A. longiremis Lilljeborg, he named it L. haiisnii. described and figured the male 

 but unfortunately not the more important female. As his male differs from m\- above-described spec- 

 imen in a couple of features to be discussed presently, I asked Dr. Vanhoffen to lend me a few spec- 

 imens; I received the whole material, six females and an adult male, and I beg the Direction of the 

 Berlin Museum and Dr. Vanhoffen to accept my sincere thanks. The females captured by Dr. Van- 

 hoffen agree perfecth' with my specimens from other localities, but the male must be mentioned 

 separately. 



Dr. Vanhoffen's specimen is 1.5""", thus distinctly a little larger than mine. He figured the 

 endopod of the uropod as three-jointed, but it is in realitx onl\- two-jointed, as no articulation is found 

 at the base of the transverse row of fine hairs. His figure of the chela does not agree completely 

 with my specimen, btit an examination of his specimen, which has both chelae closed and the finer 

 structure of the incisive margins somewhat indistinct, does not reveal an\- real difference worth nien- 



llig liij;olf.F.\|<e,litio.i. III. ;. iO 



