90 CARL BOVALLIUS, AMPHIPODA HYPERIIDEA. I. 2. HYPERIID.E. 



sarum {Metoecus), Kroeyer, and gives as doubtful synonyms Cancer medusarum, 0. F. 

 Muller, and 0?iiscus medusarum, 0. Fabricius, it is, however, none of these species but, 

 according to my examination of his specimens, Hyperoche Luetheni, G. Bovallius. 



A. Merle Norman in 1869 1 ) quotes Metoecus medusarum, Kroeyer, from the Shet- 

 land Isles. To judge from the short description it is clear that the animal in question 

 is not identical with Kroeyer's species. If it may be an Hyperoche abyssorum or a H. 

 Luetkeni I am not able to decide. 



A. Boeck in 1870 1. c, p. 86 (6) cites Kroeyer's species as Metoecus medusarum, 

 0. Fabricius, and gives a good diagnosis in latin, which runs: 



»Pedes 1 parts articulo 3tio in margine posteriore ad radicem calcis producto. Pedes 

 3tii et 4ti paris articulo tertio perbvevi, vix longiore qvam lato. Pedes trium p avium ulti- 

 morum articulo 3tio perbrevi, 4to longitudinem duplam articuli 3tii superanti. Pedes salta- 

 torii ultimi paris pedunculo pradongato fere ter longiore qvam ramo exterioro). 



In 1872 1. c, p. 82, he calls it Tauria medusarum, 0. Fabricius; with the same 

 diagnosis as in his earlier work. In 1882 G. 0. Sars 1. c, p. 75, unites Tauria abys- 

 sorum, a by Boeck in 1870 established new species, with Kroeyer's old species under the 

 name Tauria medusarum, 0. Fabricius. In 1885 1. c, p. 17, I called the present species 

 Hyperia Kroeyeri, n. n. and in 1887 1. c, p. 18, Hyperoche Kroeyeri. The same 

 year H. J. Hansen 1. c, p. 58, rejects the specific name proposed by me, and takes back 

 that used by Kroeyer, uniting with it my new species Hyperoche Luetheni, and calling 

 the whole Hyperoche medusarum, Kroeyer. In 1888 Th. Stebbing 1. c, p. 1399, accepts 

 the views of Hansen. 



Hyperoche Kroeyeri is easily distinguished from all the other species of the 

 genus by the length of the last three pairs of peraeopoda and by the curved hind margin 

 of the carpus of the third and fourth pairs. Also the form of the first and second pairs 

 is different, according to the drawings of Kroeyer, given in facsimile above, p. 87, fig. 

 8 — 10, the front margins of the carpus and metacarpus being strongly curved. 



Here follows a description of the animal principally taken from the description of 

 Kroeyer, with some additions derived from the examination of his drawings: 



The peraeon is thick and tumid, the head large, and the pleon and urus narrow, 

 in habitus just between a Hyperia and an Euthemisto. 



The head, is large, thick, egg-shaped, much deeper than long, anteriorly truncated, 

 with a distinct antennal groove. 



The first pair of antennce (fig. 2) in the female are a little longer than the head; 

 the first joint of the peduncle is twice as long as the two following joints together, the 

 second and third joints are subequal in length; the flagellum shoAvs only one joint, which 

 is more than twice as long as the whole peduncle; it is fringed with long hairs along 

 the under-side. 



J ) "Shetland Final Dredging Keport. Part. II. On the Crustacea" etc. Report of the 38th Meeting of 

 the British Association for the Advancement of Science, held at Norwich, 1868. London 1869, p. 287. 



