
HALE—AUSTRALIAN CUMACEA 91 
Length 8 mm. to 9 mm. 
Loc. South Australia: St. Vincent Gulf, Brighton eset Mawson and 
L. M, Angel, Oct. 18, 1941, 8.15 to 8.30 p.m.; Oct. 22, 1941, 9.30 to 9.45 p.m., and 
Nov. 13, 1941, with submarine light traps.) 
Hab, North-Western Australia and South Australia. 
This record considerably extends the known range of the species. It is of in- 
terest that despite years of collecting in St. Vincent Gulf, mjobergt was not taken 
until males swarmed on two separate dates in shallow water (the specimens were 
secured from a jetty). In the first. haul a ‘‘white’’ submarine light of low candle- 
power was employed and over two thousand examples were found in the net after 
an immersion of fifteen minutes; a few individuals of other Cumacea and some 
Amphipods were also present. Nine days later the same procedure was adopted 
with a green light and about seven hundred specimens congregated in the net in 
fifteen minutes. As before all were males of almost uniform size. Ina third haul 
three weeks after this only a few males were found. The collectors used red sub- 
marine light at the same time as the green. Amphipoda predominated in the red 
light-trap but the reverse obtained in the green. 
levis group (b). 
Carapace compressed, particularly in male and subadult female, the sides rising steeply to 
the sharp median carina of the back; pseudorostral lobes truneate anteriorly, barely or not 
meeting in front of the ocular lobe, which is large, with prominent lenses. 
Apices of both rami of uropods simple. 
Four Australian species, if Foxon’s Queensland record for the New Zealand levis is correct; 
it is assumed herein that the last-named has all the above characters. 
CYcLASPIS LEVIS Thomson. 
Cyclaspis levis Thomson, 1892, p. 264, pl. xvi, fig. 1-6, and pl. xvii, fig. 7-26; 
Foxon, 1932, p. 389. 
With a score of species clustering, as it were, around this form, it is unfortu- 
nate that it is insufficiently diagnosed and that it has not been rediscovered with- 
out doubt during the past half century. The group name is retained because 
levis has been so often referred to. 
It may be assumed that Thomson’s interpretation of the ocular lobe and its 
lenses (his specimens were from surface and shallow water) is as improbable as 
the dramatic apical projection of the basis of the first. peraeopods which he illus- 
trates (Calman, 1907, p. 9). Venturing further, and supposing that the rest of 
Thomson’s description and figures are reasonably accurate, then cretata, granu- 
losa, concinna, formosae and herdmamni fall naturally into place beside it. If levis 
really possesses an apical tooth (of more reasonable size than described) on the 
basis of the first legs, then concinna is removed from the list. In any ease, cretata 
seems to be closest to levis but is distinguished by the more numerous and shorter 
spines on the inner edge of the endopod of the uropod where there are no slender 
setae as figured by Thomson (see key to species) ; pura has uropods similar to those 
shown for levis. 
Stebbing (1913, p. 32, syn.) queries Calman’s reference of some New Zealand 
specimens to levis and that author himself expressed uncertainty. The provisional 
name calmant is herein proposed for these examples. 
Foxon more recently records levis from north-eastern Queensland, “put no 
details concerning his material are given. 
CYCLASPIS CRETATA sp. nov. 
Adult male. Integument thin, calcified but somewhat flexible; glossy, with 
fine reticulate pattern and very small pitting. 
