358 1>R. W. M. TATTERSALL ON THE STOMATOPODA AND 



present specimen they are quite well marked and terminate in the lateral 

 spines of the telson. The submedian carinas of our specimen are interrupted 

 at about their centre. This may be what Bigelow means in calling it 

 serrated. I may also remark that between the submedian and intermediate 

 spines of the telson there are two lobes on the left side but only one on the 

 right. There are ten spines on the outer margin of the proximal joint of 

 the exopod of the uropods, the last of which reaches the level of the apex 

 of the distal joint. The outer spine of the bifurcate process of the uropods 

 is slightly longer than the inner, the latter reaching the apex of the endopod 

 of the uropods, the former reaching half-way down the distal joint of the 

 exopods. The raptorial claws of this specimen agree with Bigelow's 

 description in having the pectinations on the inner margin of the propodus 

 confined to the proximal half of that margin. There are no traces of eye- 

 spots on the carapace. The most serious differences from Bigelow's 

 description presented by the present specimen are the characters of the eye 

 and the number of spines on the sixth abdominal segment. The notch on 

 the lateral margin of the eighth thoracic segment may have been overlooked, 

 while the spinitorm nature of the postero-lateral corners of the abdominal 

 segments is a variable character. Nobili, in recording this species from the 

 Red Sea, notes that in his specimens only the fourth, fifth, and sixth segments 

 of the abdomen had spines at the postero-lateral corners. But in his 

 specimens the inner and outer spines of the bifurcate process of the uropods 

 were subequal. He makes no mention of the size of the eyes, and we must 

 presume that the sixth abdominal segment bore eight spines. The nearest 

 relative of this species is P. oculata, from which the present specimen is 

 distinguished by the absence of a spine on the rostrum, and by the presence 

 of second lateral carinse on the telson instead of first laterals. On the whole, 

 I prefer to leave the present specimen in the species to which I have referred 

 it. More material of both sexes is required before it can be stated whether 

 the differences I have pointed out between my specimen and Bigelow's 

 description are constant enough to be of specific importance. 



Since writing the above, I have received a copy of Mr. Kemp's paper 

 " On a collection, of Stomatopod Crustacea from the Philippine Islands," 

 in which he gives some notes on a single specimen of Pseudosquilla megalo- 

 phthalma which he examined from that locality. I am now certain that my 

 specimen belongs to that species. Kemp's specimen agrees with the present 

 one in characters 3, 4, and 5 given above as points of difference between my 

 specimen and Bigelow's description. Kemp gives no measurements for the 

 eye, and the rostrum of his specimen is longer in proportion to the breadth 

 than in mine, but these differences are trifling. Unfortunately, the Bed Sea 

 specimen shows no traces of the distinctive coloration described by Kemp. 



Distribution. Mauritius (Bigelow) ; Obock in the Red Sea, and Djibouti 

 (Nobili) ; Philippine Islands (Kemp). 



