574 DR THOMAS SCOTT ON THE 
shown in the drawing (fig. 1); the length of the specimen represented by this drawing 
is 2mm. ‘The siphon is short and subtriangular, and the mandibles are elongated and 
shghtly dentated on the inner edge near the apex (fig. 4). 
The antennules are composed of nine joints; the second joint is small, but the first 
and third are elongated; these three joints are together about half the entire length of 
the antennule ; the next four joints are small, while the end one is about as long as the 
preceding two joints combined ; a moderately long sensory filament springs from near the 
extremity of the end joint (fig. 2). The antenne are composed of three joints; the first 
is elongated, and bears a small secondary branch ; the other two are shorter, and the end 
one is furnished with a long, slender appendage, slightly hooked at the apex (fig. 3). 
The mandibles and maxillze are somewhat similar to the same organs in Artotrogus. 
orbicularis, Boeck. 
The first and second maxillipeds and the first three pairs of swimming feet are also 
similar to those of the species mentioned. In the fourth pair of thoracic legs, the inner 
ramus is more slender and rather shorter than the outer, and the end joint is provided 
with a single plumose seta on the inner margin ; the same joint is furnished with two apical 
setee, which are also plumose, and there is a minute bristle on the outer margin (fig. 8). 
The fifth pair are small, uniarticulate, and furnished with two terminal sete of 
unequal length (fig. 9). 
Habitat.—Scotia Bay, South Orkneys; collected in June 1903; Station 325, 
60° 43’ 42” S., 44° 38’ 33’ W. ‘Two specimens occurred in a small sample of siftings from 
trawled material. ‘I'he species approaches so near to Artotrogus orbicularis, Boeck, both 
in its general form and in the structure of its appendages, that there was at first some 
doubt as to whether it should be regarded as a distinct species. A careful examination, 
however, reveals certain differences, which it may be as well meanwhile to recognise, as, 
for example, the difference in the armature, and to some extent also in the structure of the 
antennee ; the difference in the form of the siphon; the rather more slender maxillipeds ; — 
the difference in the form of the fifth pair of thoracic legs and in the structure of the 
abdomen. ‘These differences, while in themselves inconsiderable, are, I think, when 
taken together, suthciently important to warrant the separation of this Antarctic 
Artotrogus under a distinct name. 
Fam. SAaPPHIRINID A. 
Genus Sapphirina, J. V. Thompson, 1829. 
Sapphirina ovatolanceolata, Dana. 
1849, Sapphirina ovatolanceolata, Dana, Proc. Amer. Acad., Boston, vol. ii. pp. 8-16. 
The only gatherings in which this Sapphirina was observed were collected at 
Stations 14, 32, 36, and 49, 21° 28’ N., 22° 40’ W., to 1° 58’ N., 27° 26’ W., andugiam 
Station 60, 3° 25’ S., 33° 13’ W., and Station 105, 38° 45’ S., 58° 30’ W. Only a few 
specimens were noticed. 
