8 EEV. T. E. E. STEBBING- ON THE 



second gnathopods have been confused, the larger first gnathopods with the spines on 

 the apex of the M'rist being figured and described as the second. 



Professor Grube in 1869 described and figured a specimen from St. Vaast-la-Hougue 

 under the title " TIrotlwe marinus, Sp. Bate, 1 var. pectinatus, Gr." (in the explanation 

 of the plate " Urothoe marinus, Sp. B. ("? var. pectina, Gr.)." The account of the lower 

 antenna shows that the specimen was a female. Grube says that these antennse have five 

 joints, the second much longer than the first, armed above with a subtriple row of spines, 

 the third simple, and armed with an outer row of rather long sette, the flagellum very 

 short, equalling the length of the third joint. The so-called second joint with the 

 suUriple row of spines is evidently the fourth joint of the peduncle, the so-called third 

 being the fifth, and the remaining two joints constituting the flagellum. He notices 

 that the finger of the second gnathopods is shorter than that of the first. He would 

 have been well content to assign the specimen to Urothoe marinus, Bate & "Westwood, 

 but for certain differences in the per6eopods, especially the third pair, and in the 

 uropods and telson. The stripes and patches of yellow-ochre which he notices on the 

 three hinder pairs of perseopods are not peculiar to any one species of Urothoe, being 

 due to the gland-cells which, are found in almost every part of the animal. The spines 

 on the third, fourth, and fifth joints of the third perseopods are not fully represented 

 in Spence Bate's figures, but such details often escape notice, or are only perfunctorily 

 represented before their importance has been brought into special prominence, so that 

 it is rash of Grube to infer that had they been present they could not have been 

 neglected. In regard to the plumose setge on these limbs Grube himself has fallen 

 into some misapprehension. He says that Spence Bate speaks only of one row of 

 simple hairs on the hind rim of the third perseopods, while in Grube's specimen they 

 are as decidedly plumose as Spence Bate figures them on the fifth pair^ ; the first joint, 

 too, appears in Spence Bate noticeably narrowed below, whereas he (Grube) found it 

 equally broad above and below. But Spence Bate speaks only of the first joint as 

 having the hind margin "fringed with a row of simple hairs," just as Grube himself 

 figures it. " The rest of the leg is remarkable for long plumose cilia," according to 

 the account in the ' British Sessile-eyed Crustacea.' In the full figure given in that 

 work of Urothoe marinus, the first joint of the third perseopods answers to Grube's 

 description of it ; but in a full figure the limbs being seen at all sorts of angles often 

 give but a very rough idea of their actual details, and in the separate figure of the limb 

 in question it is at once seen that the first joint is, as is nsual throughout the genus, 

 broader below than above. The first uropods are omitted from Grube's figure of his 

 specimen ; but in the Latin description he says that the first and second uropods reach 

 almost equally far back, rarely beyond the peduncle of the third pair, having their 

 rami shghtly curved. By this account the position of the species is left obscure. The 



' It is in Urothoe elegans, not in Urothoe marinus, that Spence Bate figures tlie plumose seta; on the fifth 

 peia^opods. 



