ON BOSMINIDJE, MACROTHRICIDiE, ETC. 383 



9. Lyjstceus keticulatus, {Baird.) 



1843. Alona reticulata, Baird. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. 

 II, p. 93. PI. Ill, fig. 12; and Trans. Berwickshire 

 Naturalists' Club, Yol. II, p. 151. 



1850. Alona reticulata, Baird. Brit. Entom., p. 132. PI. XYI, 

 fig. 3. 



1863. Alona reticulata, Schoedler. Neue Beitrage zur Natur- 

 geschichte der Cladoceren, p. 25. PL III, figs. 57, 58. 



Dr. Baird's description of this species is as follows — "In size 

 this is perhaps the smallest of all the species of this family, being 

 still smaller than the Acroperus nanus. Shell of a quadrangular 

 shape, rounded a little posteriorly, and nearly straight on anterior 

 margin, which appears free from cilia. The lower margin is 

 obtuse, and the whole shell is very closely reticulated. Beak 

 prominent and long, projecting upwards, rather blunt. Eye 

 large for size of animal, areolar. Inferior antennas or rami 

 rather slender; anterior branch provided with four seta?, one 

 short from second, and three long and stout from last articula- 

 tion; posterior branch has three from last joint only. Abdomen 

 rather tapering towards the extremity, and serrated on inferior 

 margin. Intestine convoluted, but it is not easily seen from 

 reticulated surface of shell. One ovum. Habitat; found near 

 Southall, Middlesex, July, 1841 ; September, 1849." 



Schoedler's figures of the species, which he considers to be 

 Barrel's represent the ventral margin slightly ciliated, the infero- 

 posteal angle well rounded, and not furnished with any teeth ; 

 and the abdomen broad, truncate at the extremity, the supero- 

 posteal angle well rounded, the claws long and slender, and fur- 

 nished with a spine at the base. 



Since our remarks on L. testudinarius, as well as on trigonellus, 

 uncinatus, rostratus (ovatus) and nanus were penned, we have 

 submitted specimens to Dr. Baird, who agrees with us in con- 

 sidering all the latter to be the species described by himself; 

 but he does not regard the first as identical with his reticulata. 

 Unfortunately, none of the types of the Lynceidse described in 



