46 THE VOYAGE OF H.M.S. CHALLENGER. 



Leachia, Lesueur, 1821 ; Steenstrup, 1861. 



Anisodus (?), Rafinesque. 

 Loligopsis (pars), d'Orbigny, Auott. 

 DycUjdiopsis, de RochebruBe. 

 PeivtMs, Rathke. 



1. Leachia cyclura, Lesueur. 



1821. Leachia cyclura, Les., Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad., vol ii. p. 90, pL vi. 



1833. Loligopsis guttata, Grant, Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond., vol i. p. 24, pi ii. 



1833. PerotMs pellucida, Rathke, Mem. Savans liitrang. St. Petersb., t. ii. p. 149. 

 1833. „ EschoUzii, Eatbke, lUd. 



186L Leachia cyclura, Stp., Overblik, p. 82. 



1884. PerotMs Dussumieri, Eoohebr., Monogr. Loligopsidee, p. 28. 



1885. Leachia cyclura, Hoyle, Loligopsis, p. 326. 



2. Leachia ellipsoptera (Adams and Reeve), Steenstrup. 



1848. Loligopsis ellipsopitera. Ad. and Rv., Voy. " Samarang," MoU., p. 2. 



1861. Leachia ellijpsoptera, Stp., Overblik, p. 80. 



1884. Dyctydiopsis ellipsoptera, Rochebr., Monogr. Loligopsidse, p. 18. 



1885. Leachia ellipsoptera, Hoyle, Loligopsis, p. 328. 



3. Leachia dubia (Rathke), Hoyle. 



1833. Perothis cluhia, Rathke, Mem. Savans Etrang. St. Petersb., t ii. p. 170. 

 1885. Leachia dubia, Hoyle, Loligopsis, p. 329. 



Loligopsis,^ Lamarck, 1812. 

 Loligopsis, Auott. {pars). 



1. Loligopsis peronii, Lamarck. 



1812. Loligopsis Peronii, Lmk., Extrait de son Cours de Zool, p. 123 {fide d'Orb.). 

 1861. „ „ Stp., Overblik., p. 85. 



1885. ,, „ Hoyle, Loligopsis, p. 314. 



2. Loligopsis zygsena, Verany.- 



1851. Loligopsis zygxna, Vfer., C^ph. medit., p. 125, pi. xl. fig. c. 



1884. Zygeenopsis zygxna, Rocbebr., Monogr. Loligopsidae, p. 20. 



1885. (?) zygxna, Hoyle, Loligopsis, p. 331. 



1 The true position of this genus is entirely uncertain : the description of the type species, based upon a drawing, 

 is so fragmentary, that nothing can be extracted from it as to the affinities of the animal. See also note p. 20. 



^ This is certainly not a Loligopsis in the Lamarckian sense, but at present there is no gromid for referring it to any 

 known genus whatever, nor do I think its characters sufficiently well known to enable a new genus to be erected of 

 it ; 1 therefore leave it as placed by the original describer. The name proposed by de Koohebrune is preoccupied. 



