278 Records of the Indian Museum. [Vol. XXIV, 



is, however, very defective, so that it seems best to retain Nobili's 

 name. The specimens which Borradaile referred to C. suterba var. 

 japonica doubtless belong to this species ; his figures agree very 

 closely with specimens I have examined. The only discrepancy is 

 that Borradaile has apparently omitted to notice that his specimens 

 are distinguished from C. superba by the presence of the hepatic 

 spine. 



8985/6. Rutland I, Andamans. ' Investigator,' Nov., One. 



1887. 

 C 430/1. Port Blair, Andamans. S. Ktmp, Feb., 1^15. Fourteen. 



C431/1. Port Blair, Andamans. J. Wood-Mason. Three. 



C 432/1. Cheval Paar, Ceylon. T. Southwell, Nov., One. 



1910. 

 C 433/1- Red Sea. Mus. Zool. Napoli. Two, Co- 



types. 



The species has been recorded from Ternate (de Man), from 

 the S. Coast of Arabia (Balss) and from numerous localities in the 

 Red Sea (Nobili, Balss, Tattersall). Borradaile (loc. cit., p. 324) has 

 recorded the species under the name of C. japonica from the Mal- 

 dives, the Chagos Archipelago and Saya de Malha. Like other 

 species of the genus, C. lucina appears to be associated with 

 madrepore corals. 



Genus Onycocaris Nobili. 



1906. Coralliocaris subgen. Onycocaris, Nobili, Ann. Sci. nat., Zool. 

 (9) IV, p. 60. 



Nobili has proposed Onycocaris as a new subgenus of Corallio- 

 caris for the reception of two species, C. aualitica and C. rhodope, 

 both obtained at Djibouti in the Red Sea. In C. aualitica the 

 dactylus of the last three pairs of legs bears a large accessory 

 claw and is denticulate and slightly swollen at the base. In C. 

 rhodope the accessory claw is very short, scarcely larger than the 

 denticulations which exist on either side of it and the basal part 

 is not swollen. 



I have already expressed the view that those two remarkable 

 species cannot be included, even under a distinct subgeneric head- 

 ing, in Stimpson's Coralliocaris, and with the information we at 

 present possess it appears to me to be impossible to arrive at any 

 satisfactory conclusion regarding their true position. I have been 

 obliged to omit Onycocaris from my synoptic key to the genera of 

 the subfamily. 



Nobili, as usual, has failed to give any description of the 

 mouth-parts and the two species seem to differ so widety from one 

 another that it may be doubted whether there is any real generic 

 affinity between them. In 0. aualitica the spine at the distal end 

 of the antennal scale is wanting and the outer margins of the 

 uropods are said to be finely denticulate. These characters do not 

 occur in C. rhodope, nor so far as I am aware in any other species 

 of the subfamily. 



