28 EEV. T. E. E. STEBBINa ON THE 



ornamented with rose-coloured markings \ Urothoe imlcliella (Costa) has the fourth 

 joint of the third perseopods wider than in any other species. UrotJwe marinus, Sp. 

 Bate, alone has the rami of the first and second uropods strongly curved. JJrothoe 

 poucheU, Chevreux, appears to be distinguished from all other species by the greater 

 leno-th and stronger armature of the first uropods. Urothoe norvegica, Boeck, shows no 

 very salient diS'erence from Urothoe elegans, unless it may do so in colouring. Urothoe 

 brevicornis, Sp. Bate, makes a near approach to Urothoe marinus, except in regard to 

 its longer and straighter uropods. Dana's Urothoe irrostratus is the only species at 

 present known from the Pacific. As Spence Bate has pointed out, it makes a near 

 approach to Urothoe elegans ; but as the figures and description are incomplete, it is not 

 at present possible to decide whether it is identical with any European species or 

 otherwise. The exact position of Grube's Urothoe marinus, var. pectinatus, is also 

 doubtful. 



EXPLANATION OF THE PLATES. 



PLATE I. 



Urothoe elegans. 

 The full figure is given in lateral view, the three lines above it indicating the 

 natural size of a female, a male, and a young specimen, respectively. 

 a.s. Upper antenna of the male ; a.s, ij>, of the young. 

 a.i. Lower antenna of the male; a.i, ? , of the female; a.i, i^, of the 

 young. 

 Lower lip of the female. 

 First gnathopod of the male. 

 Second gnathopod of the male. 

 ;prj). 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. The first, second, third, fourth, and fifth perseopods respectively, oi 

 the male. 

 j)rjp. 2, -^ . Second peraeopod of the young. 



^rp. 5, $ . Fifth perseopod of a female ; in-j). 5, -u, of the young. 

 ur. 1, 2, 3. The first, second, and third uropods respectively, of the male. 

 ur. 2, ur. 3, ? . Second and third uropods of the female. 

 T. Telson of the male. 



' Yet such markings are still visible in a specimen from Balta Sound, Shetlands, taken by the Kev. A. M. 

 Norman in lS6i3, and labelled (probably for that very reason) as Urothoe elegans, though otherwise it does not 

 seem to be distinguishable from Urotlioe marinus. Hence it is doubtful whether reliance can be placed upon 

 colouring as a distinguishing mark of Urothoe elegans. 





u. 



?. 





gn. 



1, 





gn. 



2 





A 



o, 4, 



5. 



