CLASSIFICATION OF THE MAIOID CEUSTACEA. G53 



shming, with a flat rounded lobe [at its autero-external angle. 

 Type Stilhognatlms erytlirccus, v. Martens. 



Ttche, JBell {Platyrhynclius, Desb. & Schramm*). Upper or- 

 bital margin behind the prasocular spine well developed, laterally 

 produced, and concealing the eyes, wath a deep fissure. Ischium 

 and merus joints of outer maxillipedes flat and smooth, the third 

 or merus joint dovetailed into the second, not produced, or with 

 a small lobe at its antero-external angle. Type Tyclie lamellifrons, 

 Bell. 



Family II. MAIID^. 



Eyes retractile within the orbits, which are distinctly defined; but often 

 more or less incomplete below, or marked with open fissm'es in their 

 upper and lower margins. . Basal antennal joint always more or less 

 enlarged. 



Subfamily 1. Maiin^. (See Plate XII. figs. 7-10.) 

 {Mdiens crypt opJithalmes , M.-Edwards, part.). 



Carapace usually subtriangular. Rostrum well developed. Anterior 

 legs in male enlarged ; fingers not excavate at tips. 



This subfamily includes most of those typical forms which group 

 themselves around the common Maia, in which the carapace is 

 usually triangular or elongate-triangular, the rostrum emarginate 

 or two-spined, the orbits large, Avell defined and yet incomplete, 

 eyes completely retractile, anterior legs with fingers acute, and 

 ambulatory legs usualh'- of moderate length. 



Stimpson proposed to separate as a distinct subfamily {Lepto- 

 pincs) the group typified by Egeria {Lepto^yits, Latr.), on account 

 of the broad and somewhat cordiform merus joint of the outer 

 maxiUipedes. JEyeria could not in any case be taken as typical of 

 the group, as in it the merus joint of the outer maxillipedes is not 

 cordiform, but truncated at its distal end. A certain affinity un- 

 doubtedly exists between the genera in which the merus joint is 

 cordiform, as also between those (typified by Gamposcia) which 

 have the merus joint elongated, often rounded at the distal end, 

 and articulated with the next at the summit ; but these characters 

 cannot be employed as a basis for a general classification, and do 



* I have not had an opportunity of consulting Dr. Schramm's work, ' Crus- 

 taces de la Guadeloupe d'apres un manuscrit du doctour Desbonne, Ire partie, 

 Brachyura. Basse-Terre, 8to, 1867." In referring to it I have followed M. 

 A. Milne-Edwards's citations. 



