1906.] CRUSTACEA OF THE THIRD TANGANYIKA EXPEDITION. 191 



unarmed part of upper edge much less than half its length, one 

 or two sub-apical teeth, and occasionally an isolated tooth as 

 above described. Carpus of first pereeopods not more than two 

 and a third times as long as broad (in a series of specimens 

 collected at Entebbe, by Mr. E. Degen, the carpus is only about 

 twice as long as broad, sometimes a little less than twice). Carpus 

 of second pair less than five times as long as broad. Dacbylus of 

 foiu'th pair a little more than one-fifth of propodus, with 8-1 1 

 spines; that of fifth pair more than one -fourth of propodus, with 

 37-50 spines. Eggs '6 x '37 to -62 x "4 mm. 



Hilgendorf has recorded C. iDijckii var. gracilipes from several 

 localities in the Victoria Nyanza (Deutsch-Ost-Afrika, iv. (7) p. 36, 

 1898) and elsewhere in German East Africa. Prof. Bouvier, who 

 does not quote Hilgendorf's work, records from Victoria Nyanza 

 and from Doufile (Dufli) on the Upper Mle (about 3° 31' N. lafc.) 

 specimens which he regards as intermediate iDetween the typical 

 C. loyckii of de Man and the South African var. paitcipara Max 

 Weber. The eggs in the specimens collected by Dr. Cunnington 

 are rather smaller than those which Prof. Bouvier records from 

 Lake Victoria, and much smaller than in the typical paucipara, 

 while in other respects, such as the number of spines on the dactyli 

 of the ambulatory legs, they shov/ no approach to 2)<^i>uGipara. 



Genus LiMNOCARIDINA. 



Limnocaridina Caiman, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1899, p. 704. 



To this genus, hitherto represented by only a single species 

 discovei-ed by Mr. Moore, I refer six of the new species found 

 by Dr. Cunnington. As originally defined, the genus was 

 distinguished chiefly by the great reduction of the branchial 

 system, by the presence of a " hepatic " instead of an " antennal " 

 spine on the carapace, and by the characters of the first and 

 second maxillae and the first maxilliped. In all the species 

 described below, the branchial formula agrees with that formerly 

 given for L. tanganyikoi, and there is no epipod on the first 

 maxilliped. The structure of the maxillse is also essentially the 

 sa.me, though, in the second maxillae, the middle lobe is sometimes 

 more expanded than it is in L. tanganyikoi^ but not overlapping 

 the distal lobe. With regard to the spine on the carapace, 

 however, the new species to be described below show that the 

 difi"erence between L. tanganyikce and the species of Caridina is 

 one of position, not of homology. The spine, which in L. socms 

 and L. spinipes is in the same position as the ''antennal" spine 

 of Caridina, is clearly homologous with that which, in L. latipes, 

 L. similis, L. parirala, and L. retiarius, corresponds with what I 

 formerly described as the " hepatic " spine of L. tanganyikce. 

 In the following descriptions therefore I have abandoned the 

 terms "antennal" and "hepatic," and speak simply of the 

 " antero-lateral spine " of the carapace. In the original description 

 of L. tanganyikce it is stated that the carpus of the first pereeopods 



