CRtrSTACEA. OP THE MEB&UI ARCHIPELAGO. 207 



Tribe ANOMUEA. 



Family Deomidiidje. 



Genus Deomidia, Siimps. 



117. Deomidia unidentata, Rilpp., var. (Pi, XIY. iigs. 4,5.) 



Dromia unidentata, H'dppell, BescJireibungen und Ahbildungen von 

 24 Arten kurzschwiinzigen Krabben, 1830, p. 16, Taf. iv. fig. 2. 



Dromidia unidentata, Kossmann, Zoolog. Ergehnisse einer Reise in die 

 Kustengebiete des Rothen Meeres, II. Halfte, 1. Lief. 1880, p. 67. 



Two specimens, an adulc female and a young male, which 

 ought probably to be referred to this species, were collected in 

 King Island Bay. 



As I w^as at first unable to identify them with any known 

 species, I sent the female specimen to Dr. F. Eichters, of the 

 Museum of Frankfort oq the Main, for comparison with Eiippell's 

 types of D. unidentata. Dr. Eichters kindly compared it with 

 them, and informed me that, in his opinion, the female was a 

 local variety of _D. unidentata, Eiipp., differing from the four 

 types of Eiippell's species in the following details : — 



First, the two lateral teeth of the front are more acute and 

 more straightly directed forward in the Mergui specimen than in 

 those of Eiippell, in which they are more obtuse and more 

 divergent ; secondly, that portion of the lateral margin of the 

 cephalothorax lying between the external orbital angle and the 

 cervical suture is more regularly arcuate in Eiippell's typical 

 specimens (" bildet einen volkomraeneren Bogen," as Dr. Eichters 

 writes) than in the Mergui female, in which the lateral margin 

 is more prominent and therefore more angular. 



In Eiippell's typical specimens the inner edge of the mobile 

 finger of the hands is indistinctly dentate, whereas in the 

 Mergui individual it is armed with five or six teeth. Dr. 

 Eichters also informs me that the words " superior integer " in 

 Eiippell's diagnosis are not quite exact, the inner edge of the 

 mobile finger being feebly dentate in all the four specimens in 

 the Frankfort Collection. 



"With regard to the first diff'erence pointed out by Dr. Eichters, 

 I would observe that in the young male specimen from Mergui 



