300 MR. A. O. WALKER ON THE 
1900. I. pectinatus, Chevreux, Résult. des Camp. scientifiques 
&e., Amphipodes de l’ Hirondelle. 
Not Phoxus simplex, Bate or Bate & Westwood. 
I regret that I cannot agree with so eminent an authority as 
Dr. A. M. Norman in uniting this species with Phovus simplex 
of Sp. Bate. In order to show the identity of the two species, 
Dr. Norman has to reject Bate’s type specimen in the British 
Museum and to adopt the descriptions (insufficient at best) in 
the Brit. Mus. Catalogue and the Brit. Sessile-eyed Crustacea— 
which agree neither with each other (as he admits) nor with 
M. pectinatus—and the figures of a notoriously inaccurate 
draughtsman!* Surely this is not the kind of evidence on 
which a published species should be annulled! This is not the 
first time that P. simplex has been wrongly appropriated, Boeck 
having assigned Leptophoxus falcatus, Sars, to it in 1872. 
I have pointed out some of the differences between the two 
species in Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 6, vol. xviii. p. 157, and 
I now give a figure of the head of Bate’s type specimen of 
Phoxus simplex in the British Museum (PI. 27. fig. 23). 
HaARprnia NEGLECTA, Sars. 
St. 46. A few. 
HAaARPINIA CRENULATA, Boeck. 
St. 5. Several, very small. 
Fam. AMPELISCIDA. 
AMPELISCA DIADEMA (Costa). 
St. 46. Five young. 
Della Valle refers A. tenwicornis, Liljeb., to this species, to 
which it is certainly nearly allied. My specimens are too young 
to determine the question. 
AMPHILOCHUS NEAPOTITANUS, Della Valle. 
St.1lu. Twoyoung. Length 1-5 mm. 
Dr. A. M. Norman refers A. melanops, Walker, to this species, 
and hints that A. brunneus, D. V., might also be joined to it. I 
concur in this, especially as regards the last named, as I hold 
that A. melanops has @ closer affinity to A. brunneus than to 
A. neapolitanus. Of this last Della Valle says not only that the 
* Conf. Stebbing, ‘Fauna Hawaiiensis,’ p. 530. 
