CRUSTACEA CASPIA. 201 



Occurrence. — This si)ecies also was collected by Mr. Warpachowsky 

 in 4 different Stations. Three of these (St. 50, 58, 59) are located iu the 

 western part of t6e North Caspian Sea, whereas the 4th (St. Gl) lies far 

 north, at some distance outside the Bai Bogutyi Kultuk. 



In the collection of Dr. Grimm this form is not represented. 



Distribution. — The Azow Sea (Sowinsky). 



Gen. 3. Amatliillina '), Grimm. 



Generic Gliaracteristic. — Body comparatively robust, with the back to 

 a more or less extent distinctly keeled, the keel being in all, or in some 

 only of the segments elevated to compressed, posteriorly pointing projections. 

 Urosome short and stout, without dorsal projections, but with fascicles of 

 subdorsal spiuules, as in the genus Gammarus. Integuments not very much 

 incrusted. Cephalon with a small rostral projection, lateral lobes short and 

 obtuse, postanteunal corners well marked, lateral faces smooth. Anterior 

 pairs of coxal plates of moderate size, 4th pair the largest and distinctly 

 emarginated posteriorly in their upper part. Eyes well developed. Superior 

 antennae slender and much longer than the inferior, with a well-developed 

 accessory appendage. Oral parts normal. Gnathopoda in female rather feeble, 

 though distinctly subcheliform; those in male very strongly built and nearly 

 equal, exhibiting a structure similar to that in the male of the genus Gmelina. 

 Pereiopoda of moderate length and edged in their outer part with fascicles 

 of stiff bristles, dactylus in all strong and curved; last paii" somewhat shorter 

 than the penultimate one, and having the basal joint rather large and lami- 

 narly expanded. Last pair of uropoda comparatively small, scarcely reaching 

 beyond the others, outer ramus sublinear, with scattered fascicles of spines, 

 and having a distinct, narrow terminal joint, inner ramus small, squamiform. 

 Telson short and broad, cleft to the base. 



Bemarks. — In the comparatively robust body, the back of which is to 

 a more or less extent distinctly keeled and provided with lamellar dorsal 

 projections, this genus somewhat reminds of the genus Amathilla. It differs, 

 however, rather materially in the structure of the several appendages, and 

 in this respect comes much nearer to the genus Gammarus^ being chiefly 

 distinguished from that genus by the poor development of the last pair of 

 uropoda. 



1) Dr. Grimm spells the name AmathiUinella, but this term cannot properly be accepted 

 since it is a diminutive of Amathillina, a generic name which does not as yet exist. Probably 

 Dr. Grimm had in view to form a diminutive of Amathilla, but this would correctly have been 

 AmathUklla, a name which would be inconvenient by its cacophony. Moreover Amathilla is 

 itself a diminutive of Amathia, aud to form a diminutive of a diminutive, would in every case 

 seem to be objectionable. 



'I»ii3.-MaT. cTp. 201. 23 



