46 

fs F074 e 
fr LOY OG Ler 
SIG 
00D, 

Fig. 48S. latirostris. A, male, B, rostrum and antennule, male, C, 
ephippial female. 


M.J. ORLOVA-BIENKOWSKAJA 

number of denticles. I believe that both features vary within 
populations and cannot be diagnostic characters. 
S. serrulatus var. mixta, described from Java, differs from the 
typical S. serrulatus by the high head, large eye and elongate ocellus 
(Grochmalicki, 1915). I have no material from Java, but specimens 
from South-East Asia and Australia do not differ from European S. 
serrulatus. Furthermore, the diagnostic characters of this form 
varies within populations. I suppose this variety to be a synonym of 
S. serrulatus. In addition, S. serrulatus var. mixtus is the primary 
junior homonym of S. mixtus Sars, 1903. 
S. serrulatus var. pelagicus Brehm was described from the pelagial 
zone of a small lake in New Guinea (Brehm, 1959). The type 
material, consisting of juvenile females, is probably lost (N.N. 
Smirnov, personal communication). The author does not point out 
any other differences between S. serrulatus var. pelagicus and 
typical S. serrulatus except the head shape. I take S. serrulatus var. 
pelagicus to be a synonym of S. serrulatus, because this character 
varies within populations. 
‘S. serrulatus var. spinosulus Stingelin, 1904’ mentioned by 
Flossner (1972) as a synonym of S. serrulatus, does not exist. The 
variety S. vetulus var. spinosulus Stingelin belongs to the subgenus 
Simocephalus s. str. 
S. semiserratus Sars, 1901 
Fig. 44 
Simocephalus semiserratus Sars, 1901: 23; S. capensis (S. 
semiserratus Sars, 1901): Daday, 1905: 209; S. serrulatus (S. 
semiserratus Sars, 1901): Kanduru, 1981: 72; Michael & Sharma, 
1988: 83. 
TYPE MATERIAL. Lectotype (designated by Orlova-Bienkowskaja 
(1995a)): Brasil, Sao Paulo, Itatiba: CBS: 9 ad. (ZMO, F 9176). 
