156 A. Alcock — Carcinological Fauna of India. [No. 3, 



inconspicuous, keeping close to the lateral border. Rostrum a non- 

 cylindriiCal bifid tooth, with a smaller spine on either side of its base. 

 2nd joint of antenna-peduncle having its antero-external angle produced 

 to form a spine. Palate distinctly delimited from the epistome every- 

 where except in the middle line. The last pair of legs reach to the end 

 of the carpus of the preceding pair. 



Types H. harhata (Herbst) and H. andamajiica, Alcock. 



HoMOLAx. Carapace urn-shaped, its greatest breadth being behind, 

 across the middle of the branchial regions : the Unea anomurica conspic- 

 uous, running well inside the lateral border. Rostrum as in Homola. 

 2nd joint of antenna-peduncle having its antero-external angle acute, 

 but not spiniform. Palate as well demarcated from the epistome in th6 

 middle line as it is elsewhere. The last pair of legs reach beyond the 

 end of the carpus of the preceding pair. 



Type H. megalops, Alcock. 



Paromola Wood-Mason. '* Carapace decidedly macrurous in form," 

 its greatest breadth being behind : the Unea anomurica very conspicuous 

 and well inside the lateral border. Rostrum a simple cylindrical spine 

 of large size, flanked on either side by a single spine of equal or greater 

 size. 2nd joint of antenna-peduncle not produced or specially acute at 

 the antero-external angle. Palate everywhere well demarcated from 

 the epistome. The last pair of legs not reaching beyond the end of the 

 merus of the preceding pair. 



Types H. cuvieri, Roux and JS. profundorum, Alcock. 



Subgenus Homola. 



21 . Homola andamamca, Alcock. 



Homola andamanica, Alcock, Investigator Deep- Sea Brachyura, p. 7 : and Illus- 

 trations of the Zoology of the Investigator, Crustacea, pi. xl. fig. 1. 



This may, very possibly, prove the same as Homola orientalis 

 Henderson, though it cannot be quite reconciled with the description, 

 still less with the figure, of that species. 



In any case it is probably only a variety of Homola harhata., with 

 3 good specimens of which — representing both sexes — it has been 

 compared. The only differences between it and H. harhata are the 

 following : — 



The eyes are more reniform. The second spine of the lateral 

 border is just behind the hepatic region. There are spines on the 

 posterior border of the meropodites of all four pairs of walking legs. 



