BENERA UEOTHOE AJ^D UEOTHOIDES. 5 



In 1856 Spence Bate published a third species of the genus under the name 

 Gammarus elegans, which in 1857 he changed to Urothoe elegans. The type 

 specimen from Plymouth was described in detail, and figured in the British- 

 Museum Catalogue in 1862. Many of the characters given are common to other 

 species. The long flagellum of the lower antennae shows that the specimen was 

 a male. The eyes are described as " nearly horizontal, long ovate," the palms of the 

 gnathopods as " oblique, imperfectly defined, ciliated," the fingers of the perseopods as 

 straight and sharp. In the fifth peraeopods, it is said, "a few long plumose cilia 

 mixed with short simple ones occur upon the posterior margins of the carpus and 

 propodos." The first and second uropods are said to be short, with the " rami very 

 short, shorter than their respective bases, subequal," while the third pair are, as usual, 

 " long ; rami longer than base, plumosely ciliated." In the figure the postero-lateral 

 angles of the third pleon-segment are decidedly acute. In the ' British Sessile-eyed 

 Crustacea' (1862) a figure of the species similar to that iu the Catalogue is given, with 

 a much shorter description. Here the authors think two "important points," the 

 shape of the eyes and the size of the antennae, sufficient to distinguish it from UrotJioe 

 marinus. " The rest of the animal," they say, " scarcely off'ers any specific variation 

 from U. marinus." As the size of the antennae is dependent on age and sex, the only 

 character left for distinction is that of the eyes, which, the authors say, " are uniform." 

 Since this has no meaning, it becomes a question whether the word intended may have 

 been reniform or oviform. An explanation is given that the specific name was suggested 

 by the extremely beautiful colouring, — whitish-buff", and parts mottled with pink, — but 

 no stress is laid upon this as a specific character. The Scotch specimens of Urothoe, 

 from the Clyde and the Shetland Isles, which make the nearest approach to this species, 

 agree with Spence Bate's figure of it in not having the joints below the first in the third 

 peraeopods much dilated, and in having the corresponding joints in the two following 

 pairs rather elongate ; but no specimens that have come under my observation have the 

 postero-lateral angles of the third pleon-segment acutely produced as in Spence Bate's 

 figure of Urothoe elegans, or the second uropods with rami so very short. The dis- 

 crepancies may be explained by the fact that no dissection of the specimen was made. 

 This will account for the circumstance that the first and second per^opods are drawn 

 with seven joints, the third only with five, and that no regard is paid to the long 

 plumose setae on the third and fourth peraeopods. 



In 1857, under the name of Sulcator marinus, Spence Bate published a species which 

 in 1862 he figured and more fully described as Urothoe marinus, having received it from 

 the Moray Pirth, the Shetlands, and the Clyde. It was pointed out by Giard in 1876 that 

 the brevity of the lower antennae relied on as a specific character only indicated that 

 the specimen examined was a female. In the description of these antennae it is stated 

 that the//-s^ joint of the peduncle is " furnished with three longitudinal rows of obtuse- 

 pointed spines," and that the fiagellum consists of a single joint ; but that which by a 



