PACKARD.] PHYLLOPODS OF NORTH AMERICA. 7 341 
and B. ferox, which, as we have previously explained, are true Branchi 
nectee, and also Chirocephalus diaphanus. In 1870 Verrill eliminated his 
Branchipus vernalis, described in 1869 under the name Hubranchipus 
vernalis, and also remarked that “this genus appears to include Bran- 
chipus spinosus Edwards, from a salt lake near Odessa, but the latter 
appears to have no tooth at the base of the second joint of the claspers.” 
Had Professor Verrill had specimens for examination he would un- 
doubtedly have seen that this species was a Branchinecta. 
I do not see good reasons for separating our common American spe- 
cies generically from the common European B. stagnalis and the less 
known more recently described species B. grubet. Comparing B. ver- 
nalis with 6. stagnalis, the frontal lobes of stagnalis are in position ho- 
mologous with the much more complicated ones of B. vernalis and the 
lobulated, highly complicated ones of B. grubet. In both species the 2d 
joint of the claspers is thick, in section triangular, but much slenderer 
than the very thick 1st or basal joint.* 
The ovisae and penis, as well as the caudal appendages and the gen- 
eral form of the body, are the same. B. grubei Dybowsky, which I have 
received from Breslau through Professor Siebold, is a genuine Branchi- 
pus; the large, deeply lobulated frontal appendages, a sexual character 
peculiar to the males, are only exaggerations of those of B. vernalis. 
It has similar stout claspers; the ovisac of the female differs from the 
two other species examined, in being a little longer and slender, but 
still it retains the short, broad, bottle-shaped form so characteristic of 
the genus, while the caudal stylets are the same. 
To this genus also undoubtedly belongs Fischer’s Branchipus biro- 
stratus (see Middendorf’s Reise, p. 152, Pl. VIL, figs. 12-16, from Char- 
kow, Russia). As regards the frontal appendages, this species is inter- 
mediate between B. vernalis and B. grubei, as those organs are short, 
triangular, but little longer than in B. vernalis, but deeply, acutely | 
lobed at: the end. 
The frontal appendages in this genus and in Chirocephalus are possi- 
bly the homologues of the knob-like projections near the base of the 2d 
antennez of Artemia and Branchinecta, but the frontal appendages are 
situated nearer the base of the 1st joint, and are more dorsal. On the 
outer side of each appendage there are transverse lines reaching to the 
edge between the tubercles, giving a segmented appearance to the outer 
half of the appendage. Under a Tolles’ + B eyepiece the tubercles are 
seen to be filled with nucleated oval cells like those scattered through 
the meshes of the fine muscles which ramify throughout the middle re- 
gion of the appendage. The cells are not nerve-cells, and I do not 
regard these organs as sensory, but probably auxiliary to the claspers, 
and possibly of use in holding the female. 
Synopsis of the species. 
Frontal appendages short, finely lobed; 2d joint long and 
POLEEC Ope eer eer ne ste te WE  TE A Db Pe B. vernalis. 
Frontal appendages very long, with six long finger-like processes on 
each side; 2d joint of male clasper half as long as in B. vernalis, and 
square at tip......... BPP PSM Sra tieI ea ea che PLL Seth oe NTRS B. serratus. 
*Gerstaecker makes a singular blunder in copying Dybowski’s figure in Bronn’s 
Classen und Ordnungen der Thierreich, Bd. v, abd. 1, Taf. xxix, figs. 2,4, from Dy- 
bowski in Archiv. fiir Naturgeschichte xxvi, 1. The male and magnitied head of the 
male of Dranchinecta paludosa from Greenland, correctly figured by Dybowski as such, 
are by Gerstaecker in his explanation of Tat. xxix called the female of Branchipus 
grubei. 
