94 DR. G. S. BKADT ON MTODOCOPA OBTAINED 



Sarsiella simplex, G. S. Brady. (Plate XVII. figs. 16-19 

 1888. Sarsiella simplex, G. S. Brady, " Ostracoda collected in the South Sea Islands," Traus. 

 Roy. Soc. Edinb. vol. x.ksv. p. 51G, pi. iv. figs. 15, 16. 



One specimen was taken by the ' Challenger ' Expedition in the tow-net off Cape 

 Howe, Australia, at night. 



Sarsiella robusta (G. S. Brady). (Plate XVII. figs. 14, 15.) 

 1888. Pleoschisma robusta S, G. S. Brady, " Ostracoda collected in the South Sea Islands," 

 Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. vol. xxsv. p. 513, pi. iv. figs. 13, 14. 



Further examination of the dried shells of this species has revealed portions of the 

 limbs, which show that it must be referred to the genus Sarsiella. The antennules 

 (fig. 14) are provided with the dense fascicle of hairs which has been described by 

 Dr. G. W. Miiller as characteristic of the male Sarsiella, and also by Dr. Norman and 

 myself under the genus Nematohamrna. 



Genus EuEVPTLUS, G. S. Brady. 



EUEYPTLTJS PETROSUS, G. S. Brady. (Plate XVI. figs. 25, 26.) 

 1870. Eurypylus petroms, G. S. Brady, Les Fonds de la Mer, tome i. p. 141, pi. .xviii. figs. 1, 2. 



The type specimen of this species remains as yet the only one which has been seen. 

 It was described from the shell only, and inasmuch as other very nearly allied forms 

 belono-ing to the genera Sarsiella and Pleoschisma have since been published, I 

 thought it well to sacrifice the shell for the sake of examining the contained animal, of 

 which, unfortunately, I succeeded in obtaining fragments only. The mandibular foot 

 (fig. 25) and caudal lamina (fig. 26) are here figured. The former, it will be seen, is 

 very similar to that of Sarsiella ; the latter to that of Pleoschisma. The differences are 

 in fact quite sufficient to indicate three distinct genera. 



The type of Eurypylus was taken off St. Vincent (Cape Verd). 



Family HALOCYPRID^. 



Of many of the species belonging to this group I have seen only imperfect examples, 

 and cannot, therefore, figure or describe them satisfactorily. They have, however, been 

 fully illustrated by Dr. Claus in his works on the Atlantic and Mediterranean Halo- 

 cypridffi. Some of the new genera proposed by Dr. Claus seem to me to be based on 

 trivial and insufficient characters, and are adopted here only as a temporary expedient. 



The most interesting point in connexion with the specimens here noted is the con- 

 firmation which they afford to the generally accepted idea of the almost cosmopolitan 

 distribution of many pelagic animals. With one exception they are referable to species 

 already described by Dr. Claus from the North Atlantic and Mediterranean, whereas 

 the ' Challenger ' specimens are mostly from the Pacific and Australasian areas. 



