26 



CARL BOVALLRTS, AMPHIPODA HYPERIIDEA. 



PARAPHRONIMID^. 



slender, with narrow femora and very elongated carpi. The femur of the first pair is 

 longer than the following joints together. The nietacarpus of the third and fourth pairs 

 is longer than that of the fifth and sixth. The fifth pair are much longer than the 

 peraäon. The sixth pair are shorter than the fifth. The seventh pair are much shorter 

 than the sixth. The peduncles of the uropoda are elongate, much longer than the rami; 

 the rami are sharp-pointed. 



Colour. »Transparent» (H. LuCAS I. c). 



Leilgth. About 7 mm. 



Hab. »The coast of Chile» (Guérin-Méneville). 



Syn. 1836'). Hyperia pedeMris, F. E. GUÉRIN-MÉNEVILLE. — Iconographie du Régne Animal de 



G. Cuvier. Crustacés, p. 22, pl. 

 25, fig. 6. Paris, 1829—43. 



» » » H. LUCAS. 1836. »Hypérie». Dictionnaire pittoresque 



d'Histoire Naturelle sous la 



direction de M. F. E. Guérin. 

 Torne, 4""^ p. 97. 



In general habitus the animal somewhat reseinbles Para2)hronima gracilis, bnt it is 

 decidedly distinguished by the very short head, and the elongated carpi of the last five 

 pairs of pera^opoda. 



The characteristics of the above diagnose are taken partly from the short description 

 of GuÉRiN-MiNÉ VILLE, partly from his excellent drawings. 



A translation of the original description follows here: 



»Very distinct by the length of the legs and of the body. The inferior antennae 

 are a little shorter than the superior, which are shorter than the head. The legs are 

 very uneqnal in length, slender, with the first joint or femur as narrow as the following 

 joints.» 



H. LuoAS 1. c. says on ^)Hyperia pedestris». 



This crustacean is about four lines long; transparent, and differs from the Hyperia 

 Lesueuri principally in the legs being much longer. This species was taken by Mr Gay 

 ainong Fucus flooting- on the surface of the sea near to Chile.» 



') It was difficult to fix the year for the foimdation of the species as the work quoted above was edited 

 during many years, but it is almost sure that the specific descriptiou of Hiiperia pedentris is from the year 1836 

 beoause oue of the new specific diag-noses, raade by Guérin-Méneville that year, is mentioned on the page 

 uext precediug the description, and because H. Lucas in the fourth volume of the Dictionary quoted above 

 refers to the plate and figure of the Iconographie; this fourth volume is printed in 1836. 



Ml. a in:di 



