S. I. Smith — Crustaceans of the Atlantic Coast. 
67 
Hippolyte Gaimardii Milne-Edwards. 
Bippolyte Gaimardii Milne-Edwards, Hist. nat. des Crust., ii, p. 378, 1837. 
Hippolyte pandaliformis Bell, History of British stalk -eyed Crustacea, p. 294 [1850?] 
Hippolyte Belcheri Bell, in Belcher, Last of the Arctic Voyages in search of Sir 
John Franklin, vol. ii, p. 402, pi. 34, fig. 1, 1855. 
Plate IX, figures 8 and 9. 
Boston Harbor, 3 fathoms, and other parts of Massachusetts Bay 
(Stimpson). Casco Bay !, among algae and eel-grass near low-water 
mark, and also in 7 fathoms, mud and dead eel-grass, 1873. East- 
port !, Maine, 1864, — one specimen only. Halifax!, Nova Scotia, 16 
and 21 fathonis, stones, sand and red algae, and 18 fathoms, fine sand 
and mud, 1877. Also off Halifax !, 52 fathoms, mud and fine sand, 
and 57 fathoms, mud and pebbles, September, 1877, — one specimen 
from 57 fathoms carrying eggs. Gulf of St. Lawrence !, “ 50 fathoms, 
stony and rocky,” and “56 fathoms, stones and coarse sand,” 1872 
(J. F. Whiteaves). Labrador !, “ common on the whole coast” 
(Packard). Grinnell Land, 79° 29' north latitude, (Miers). Bering 
Straits and Arctic Ocean (Stimpson), — H. gibba Kroyer. Greenland 
(Kroyer, et al). Iceland (Milne-Edwards, G. O. Sars). Spitzbergen 
(Kroyer, Miers). The whole Norwegian coast (Kroyer, et al.), the 
Cattegat (Kroyer), to the southern Baltic, at Kiel (Mobius, Metzger). 
Scotland ! (Norman). 
Of the twenty-five specimens which I have examined only five are 
males, and none of these have the remarkable dorsal prominence of 
the third segment of the abdomen characteristic of II. gibba Kroyer. 
None of these males, however, are over 30 mm long, and still in the 
largest of them, there is a slight carination of the third segment of 
the abdomen as if presaging the conspicuous character of t he typical 
gibba , so that I have no reason to doubt the correctness of Goes’ 
conclusion that Kroyer’s gibba was based on old males of II. Gai- 
mardii. 
Milne-Edwards’ “ Troisienu* anneau de l’abdomen moins fortement 
dente,” which Stimpson (Annals Lyceum Nat. Hist. New York, x, 
p. 126, 1871) seems to regard as throwing doubt on the identity of 
Kroyer’s Gaimardi i with that of Milne-Edwards, may have referred 
to a young male like those just mentioned, although the fact that 
Milne-Edwards is comparing his species with II. Souoerbgi (//. 
spinas ), would not necessarily imply any considerable angulation of 
the third segment of the abdomen. I think there is no reasonable 
doubt of the identity of Milne-Edwards’ species with that of Kroyer 
and more modern authors. 
