CRUSTACEA 295 
PINNOTHERES NOVAE-ZEALANDIAE Filhol. 
Pinnotheres nove-zealandiw Filhol, Mission de 1’Ile Campbell, 
1885, p.‘395, pl. xlvi., figs. 1 to 6. 
Lenz, Zool. Jahrb. xiv., 1901, p. 467, pl. xxxii., figs 11 to 14. 
One female, Station 5, three females, Station 44, one female, 
Station 20; specimens of a Pinnotheres were also seen at 
Stations 31, 36, 37, 41. Mr. Waite writes (Introduction, p. 52) 
‘Almost every adult Pinna taken had its crustacean commensal 
Pinnotheres.’’ 
The specimens from Stations 5, 44 and 20, which I have been 
able to examine, seem undoubtedly to belong to this species. 
They agree generally with Filhol’s description, but, as Lenz 
has pointed out, his figures are not exact in all points. . The 
specimens also agree with the better description given by Lenz 
and with his figures. I have also similar specimens dredged by 
Captain Bollons in Manukau Harbour and another dredged by 
him off Cuvier Island in 32 fathoms which evidently belong to 
the same species. All these specimens are of somewhat large 
size, the largest having the carapace 13mm. long and 14mm. 
wide; they are thus rather larger than the specimens examined 
by Lenz and about the same size as the female specimens 
examined by Filhol. 
Lenz’s specimens were taken in the shells of Mytilus at 
French Pass; he describes two specimens taken from the same 
locality and also from Mytilus shells as a separate species P. 
schawinslandi which appears to differ from P. novae-zealandie 
chiefly in the shape of the carapace and especially in having the 
front and the eyes visible in dorsal view. I am very doubtful 
if the characters given by Lenz are sufficient for the establish- 
ment of a separate species; the shape of the carapace varies 
somewhat in the different specimens that I have examined, 
being in some more rounded than in others; the front is not 
visible from above in the female specimens though Filhol shows 
it in his figure of the female as well as in the male. If we could 
assume that Lenz’s specimens of P. schauinslandi were males 
I would have no hesitation in looking upon them as males of 
P. nove-zealandie, but although Lenz does not state the sex of 
these specimens we cannot assume that if they were males he 
would have overlooked the possibility of their belonging to the 
same species as the females from the same locality that he was 
referring to P. nove-zealandiw. The other characters ascribed 
by Lenz to P. schawinslandi in connection with the shape of the 
chele and of the external maxillipeds do not appear to me to 
be of specific importance; the line of hairs on the upper inner 
margin of the carpus is present in all my specimens which, as I 
have said, owing to the shape of the carapace, ete., must belong 
