R. DOUGLAS LAURIE—BRACHYURA. 4.69 
fingers, appears from the measurements given above to be clearly a sex- 
difference. 
Summarising available data in regard to all these characters one finds :— 
Meral spine. Tympanum. Ratio of H.1. to Fl. 
D. sulcata (Forskal) .... Present. Absent. Fingers longer than band. 
D. affinis, Alcock, 1900, [ 
4 specimens, sex not} Absent. Present. Fingers shorter than hand. 
stated. 
Nobili’s D. sudcata, 24 gs| Absentin17. Presentin14. Fingers longer than hand in 24. 
and 2 Qs. Present in’. Absentin6,. Fingers and palm subequal in 2. 
Present specimens .... Absentin11. Presentin8. HL. (upper bord.) +F.1 gives for 
Tracein i. | Trace in J. 4 Os an average of 2:05 and 
Presentinl. Absent in 2. range of variation from 2 to 
22 mm.; for 9 Js an average 
of 1°55 and range of variation 
from 1:4 to 18 mm. 
Alcock does not state the sex of his four specimens; I suggest that they 
were females. Nobili, though giving the sex of his, does not relate it 
to finger length, probably the two in which the fingers and hand were sub- 
equal were the two females of his collection. 
N.B.—I have taken finger length as being the length of the dactylus; hand 
length might be measured in various ways, I have measured the well-defined 
upper border, the authors quoted above evidently estimated the less easily 
measurable “‘ greatest length.” 
Genus PARActistostoma, de Man, 1895. 
60. PARACLISTOSTOMA LEACHII (Audouin et Savigny, 1826). See Audouin, 
1826, p. 81 ; Savigny, 1826, pl. 2. fig. 1. 
Macrophthalmus Leach, Audouin, loc. cit.; Savigny, loc. cit. 
Paraclistostoma Leachu, Nobili, 1906, p. 316. 
Localities. Station I. A, 1 ¢ probably adult [405], 2 2 ovig. [406, 407] ; 
Station I. H, 2 g probably adult vs 409], 1 2 ovig. [410]. 
Remarks. ©.l. § ovig. 8 mm. 
In each ? the anterior surface of the propodite of W.L. 3 is hairless, 
whereas in each @ it is densely clothed with hair ; this confirms Nobili’s 
suggestion that such a hairy patch is a sex-distinction and not, as regarded 
by Paulson, a varietal one. 
The demarcation of the regions of the carapace varies somewhat in distinct- 
ness ; the slight difference in Savigny’s excellent figures between ¢ and 9 
carapace markings is evidently not a sex-distinction, as in both males in the 
present collection the transverse line across the branchial region is faintly 
indicated. 
