88 CHARLES CHILTON 
the male in which the second gnathopod has no triangular process on the 
basis and differs a little in the shape of the propod. The second form of the 
male was described as Lonchomerus gracilis by BATE from British seas and is 
now known to be widely distributed in all seas, while the first form does not 
appear to have been recorded from any locality except South America, New 
Zealand and Juan Fernandez. 
Amphithoe femorata (Kroyer). 
Amphithoe femorata Stebbing, 1906, p. 636. - 
Amphithoe brevipes Stebbing, 19¢6, p. 637. 
Locality. 
Masatierra, »among floating J/acrocystis drifting from the continent.» 
S. P. E. No. 598. April 1917. Three specimens, female, the largest about 
13 mm. in length. 
I feel pretty confident in referring these specimens to KROYER’s species, 
which was described from Valparaiso, South America. I have only female 
specimens, but they agree very closely with the description of this species 
given by STEBBING. A. érevipes (Dana) must, I think, be considered to be 
the same species. The parts that are fully figured by DANA, such, for example, 
as the antennae, are quite similar. A. dvevipes as understood by Stebbing, is 
known from the South Atlantic (Tierra del Fuego, Falkland Islands) and also 
from the South Pacific (Valparaiso). There is close general resemblance also 
between my specimens and A. rudricata (Mont.) of Europe, etc. I have been 
able to compare the Juan Fernandez specimens with two of A. rubricata from 
England as well as with SARs’ figures and though there are slight differences 
in some of the mouth parts, etc. these do not appear to be of much importance. 
DELLA VALLE grouped A. rubricata, A. femorata, A. brevipes and also A. 
brasiliensts (Dana) together as one species under the name 4A. rudricata, and 
they certainly appear to form a fairly defined group in which the extreme 
forms will probably be shown to be more and more closely connected by 
transitional forms as specimens from different localities are examined. 
In his description of A. femorata, STEBBING says »in many respects resemb- 
ling Sunamphitoe pelagica.» When first examining my specimens before I had 
dissected one to ascertain the presence of the mandibular palp I had indepen- 
dently noticed the strong resemblance to this species, and indeed for the pres- 
ence of the palp of the mandible it would not be easy to know to which of 
these two species to refer female specimens. The palp in my specimens (fig. 
3, A) is small and slender, more so than in SARS’ figure of A. rubricata. In 
each of the two specimens of A. ,ubricata from England that I have examined 
the palp of the mandible is distinctly smaller in comparison with the rest of 
the appendage than in the figure given by SARS and is much less abundantly 
supplied with setules, those on the third joint being nearly confined to the 
extremity. Probably the mandible is tending to become vestigial in this group 
