220 CARL BOVALLIUS, AMPHIPODA HYPERllDEA. I. 2. HYrEKIIU^. 



Hyperia Danm. 



metacarpus is scarcely uarrower tlian the carpus. The last three pairs are longer than 

 the two preceding. The seventh pair are longer than the fifth and sixth; the femur of the 

 seventh pair is broad; the carpus is not shorter than the tibia; the dactylus is long. The 

 lateral parts of the pleonal segments are rounded behind. The second segment of the urus 

 is free(?). The peduncle of the last pair of uropoda is more than twice as long as broad, 

 and three times as long as the inner ramus. The telson is broader tiian long, and a little 

 shoi-ter than the last ural segment; it is broader than, and less than half as long as, the 

 peduncle of the last pair of uropoda. 



Colour. (?)■ 



Lengtb. »One and a half lines« (Dana). 

 Hab. »Sooloo Sea» (Dana). 



Syn. 1852. Lestrujonus Fal>n-u .^ (H. MILNE EDWARDS.) J. D. Dana. Uuited States E.Kploring Expe- 



dition. Crustacea. Vol. 2, p. 

 985, pl. 67, fig. 10. 

 >j » •> Spence Bate. 1862. Catal. Ainph. Crust. Brit. Mu- 



seum, pl. 48, fig. 6. 



A coinpari.son of the diagnose.s and drawings given above of Lestrigonus Fabrei, 

 H. MiLNE Edwards, and L. Fabrei, Dana, proves cleai-ly that tliey are two distinct spe- 

 cies, and Dana himself did not place his species under the name L. Fabrei without he- 

 sitation, as shows the following passage from his description ; 



»The specimen here described has many of the characters of L. Fahveii; yet for want of 

 a full description of that species, we cannot pronounce on an identity.» 



And fiirther: 



»According to Milne Edwards, the legs of the first pair in the Fabreii are cylindrical, 

 and differ from those of the second pair; but we suspect that this form was observed in couse- 

 quence of the leg being turned with the upper margin to the eye. This is the natural position 

 both of the first and second pairs, in a side view of the animal, and when so situated, the pro- 

 jectiug process (thumb-like) of the antepenultimate joint is not seen.» 



Spence Bate in 1862 made matters worse by attaching a copy of the draw- 

 ing of Dana's Lestrigonus Fabreii to a translation of the diagnosis of H. Milne Ed- 

 wards' L. Fabrei, Avithout any explauation. ^) MoreoAer the copy given by Spence Bate 

 (1. c. pl. 48, fig. 6) is not very good, as for instance he delineates the person with seven 

 free segments, but in the original drawing the first three segments are given as coalesced, 

 and in his description Dana expressly states the same; further the carpus of the first 

 two pairs of peraäopoda in Spence Bate's copy is much broader than in the original, 

 and has the process broadly rounded. 



^) Above p. 140 I wrongly stato that Spence Bate's description and drawing are copied from Dana, 

 but the description is really translated from H. Milne Edwauds' Histoire naturelle des Crustacés, tome 3"", 

 pag. 82. 



