100 



Family CALLIANASSIDAE. 



There are two sub -families which are separable by the follow- 

 ing characters : — 



Rostrum large ; first pereiopods equal ; no 

 appendix interna on pleopods three to five, . . 



Upogebiinae. 



Rostrum small ; first pereiopods unequal ; an 

 appendix interna on pleopods three to five, . . 



Callianassinae. 



Sub-family CALLIANASSINAE. 



Genus Callianassa, Leach. 



Callianassa, Heller, 1863. Callianassa, Spence Bate 

 1888. Callianassa, Borradaile, 1903. 



The eyes are flattened against one another. The ischium 

 and the merus of the third maxillipedes are broader than the 

 carpus and propodite. The propodite of the third pair of pereio- 

 pods usually much flattened and expanded. Fifth pereiopods 

 more or less subchelate. There are no epipodites on the third 

 maxillipedes, or on the pereiopods, but there is a large one on 

 the first maxillipedes, and usually a small one on the second 

 maxillipedes. 



Borradaile (1903) divides Callianassa into five subgenera, 

 Calliactites, Cheramus, Trypoea, Callichirus, and Scallasis. 



To Cheramus belongs the genuine Callianassa subterranea 

 (Mont.), the name of which, as Stebbing (1893) has shown, has 

 been wrongty applied to another species. Borradaile has given 

 to this second species the name C. Stebbingi. The Irish speci- 

 mens belong to this second species; indeed it is doubtful whether 

 the real C, subterranea has been taken anywhere except on the 

 south coast of England. 



Callianassa Stebbingi, Borradaile. 

 PI. XIV, figs. 8-10. 



? Callianassa subterranea, Bell, 1853. 

 Callianassa subterranea, Heller, 1863. 

 Callianassa subterranea. Cams, 1885. 

 Callianassa subterranea, Ortmann, 1892. 

 Callianassa subterranea, Stebbing, 1893. 

 Callianassa Stebbingi, Borradaile, 1903. 

 Callianassa Stebbingi, Caiman, 1911. 



Some confusion has arisen as to the character of the third 

 maxillipedes in this species, some writers calling them pediform, 

 and others, operculiform. The explanation appears to lie in the 

 fact that there are two distinct species which have been called 

 by the same name. Stebbing (1893) points out that the original 



