CRUSTACEA COPEPODA. II. 
| Go 
of course, everywhere used and quoted. — A few genera remain, viz. two genera of the family Herpyllobiide, 
the very anomalous endoparasite Crypsidomus Lev. and the enigmatic Psilomallus Kr.; they are placed at 
the end of the paper. 
Not the slightest attempt of reform as to families or genera has been made. The material contain 
certainly a good number of new species, but only two among them differ so much from previously known 
forms, that it is necessary to establish new genera for their reception. And the number of genera represented 
in the material of any family or large division is much too small to make any attempt in classification. Un- 
fortunately the quantity and quality of the specimens of several specimens established as new is unsatis- 
factory, as frequently only a single female or male was found, and such specimens even sometimes mutilated, 
with the result that the descriptions, especially of some Asterocheride, are not as complete as desirable; 
I think, however, that it will always be possible to recognize the species established as new with absolute 
certainty. (Two species are completely omitted; one among them is represented by a single tiny and probably 
not adult specimen belonging to the semi-parasites and very different from any genus seen by me either in 
nature or in literature; the other form is endoparasitic within an Ophiurid and ovisacs were found, but the 
quality of the material was such that it was deemed completely impossible to study and make known the 
parasite.) 
As to the bathymetrical occurrence it may be said here, that some species of Asterocheridee and 
Notodelphyoida have been found in sifted bottom material secured by the “Ingolf”’ in considerable depths, 
between 300 and 600 fathoms, and three species among the Asterocheridee even from 1199 or 1435 fathoms. 
It is of course impossible to decide whether the animals in question in every case lived at the bottom, or 
perhaps sometimes have been captured in the trawl (or dredge) while it was hauled upwards; I am apt to 
think that at least in most cases the animals lived really at the bottom, and if so our knowledge of the bathy- 
metrical occurrence of members of these groups has been very considerably increased by the “Ingolf’’. 
The geographical distribution of most of the species dealt with in the present paper is still very 
fragmentary. The records in the literature are too few'; many species of parasites are far from common, and 
besides the inspection of fishes, Annelida, Malacostraca, etc. for finding parasites in hidden places has been 
too much neglected by zoologists or collectors. Furthermore the determinations in the literature are not 
always trustworthy; in some cases the figures or descriptions given by authors show differences from the 
animals seen by me of such a character that it is impossible to decide whether they are due to specific differ- 
ence, to variation, or sometimes to oversights or inaccuracies by the authors. Especially the Asterocheridee 
are frequently difficult to examine, and often so very few specimens have been seen by the authors that 
deficiencies in our knowledge especially as to variation were unavoidable. 
Before concluding these introductory remarks I beg Prof. Dr. T. Odhner accept my sincere thanks 
for having lent me the material of the Copepoda living on Annelids belonging to the Riksmuseum, Stockholm. 
1 It may be expressly said that A. Brian’s work: Copepodi parassiti dei Pesci d'Italia. 4to. Genova, 1906, has not 
been accessible to me. 
[* 
