362 DR. W. M. TATTER8ALL ON THE STOMATOPODA AND 



spinosus agree in detail with those from one of the males from Suakin 

 Harbour referred to the typical form. 



This variety has been previously recorded from the Red Sea by Nobili 

 (1906). 



Gonodactylus GLABER, Brooks, em. Henderson, non Kemp, 1913, p. 182. 



Localities. Station I. D, 1 $ , 47 mm. 



Station V. E, 20 $ , 24-54 mm., 15 ? , 24-58 mm. 



Station VII. B, 1 ? , 68 mm. Station XI., 1 $ , 35 mm. 



Station V. B. 1 cJ , 16 mm. Station V. C, 2 ? , 9 and 11 mm. 



Station V. D, 1 ? , 30 mm. No locality, 1 ? , 60 mm. 

 Remarks. This species is by far the commonest Stomatopod found in the 

 Red Sea. All the specimens, except one listed above, may be referred to the 

 var. ternatensis, De Man, and bear traces of the green colour characteristic 

 of the majority of specimens of this species. The one exception, already 

 noted, appears to be referable to the var. rotundus of Borradaile. The keels 

 on the telson are broad and swollen so as to touch one another, but there are 

 traces of spines on the three middle keels. This specimen shows no traces 

 of the two black spots on the telson which form so constant a feature of this 

 species, and its colour, as preserved, suggests a mottled or marbled light 

 brown colour in life. 



This species has been recorded from the Red Sea previously by Nobili and 

 Balss. 



Gonodactylus brevisquamatus, Paulson, 1875. (PI. 27. figs. 5-6.) 



G. brevisquamatus, Nobili, 1906 a. 



G. fimbriates, Lenz, 1905. 



G.Jimbriatus, Borradaile, 1907. 



G.Jimbriatus, Lenz, 1910. 



G. brevisquamutus and G.Jimbriatus, Kemp, 1913. 



Locality. Station IX. A, 5 $ , 4 ? , 13-28 mm. 



Remarks. From Kemp's monograph I learnt that Mr. Patience had found 

 a specimen of this species in a collection of Stomatopods from Mergui and, 

 as a result of his researches, had come to the conclusion that G. brevi- 

 squamatus, Paulson and G. fimhriatus, Lenz are synonymous. On my 

 writing to him, he very kindly allowed me to see the manuscript of his paper 

 and, after comparing my specimens with his description, I can unhesi- 

 tatingly support his view. There seems to me to be no doubt whatever 

 that the two species are one and the same. 



In the largest of my specimens the antennal scale reaches forward to the 

 extremity of the eye, and is therefore relatively longer than shown in 

 Paulson's figure, but in the smaller specimens the scale approaches much 



