170 ZOOLOGISCHE MEDEDEELINGEN — DEEL I. 



1847. M. carinimanus Gray. Cat. Crust. British Museum, p. 37 (Singapore). 

 1852. „ carinimanus H. Milne-Edwards. Ann. Sc. nat. sér. 3, Zool., t. 18 



p. 156 (Pondichéry and Mauritius). 

 1880. „ carinimanus de Man. Notes Leyden Museum, v. 2 p. 69 (Celebes). 

 1890. „ carinimanus de Man. Notes Leyden Museum, v. 12 p. 78, pi. 4 



f. 8 (no new record). 

 1897. „ carinimanus Ortmann. Zool. Jahrb. Abt. Syst., Bnd 10 p. 344 



(no new record). 

 1902. „ carinimanus de Man. Abhandl. Senckenb. Gesellsch., Bnd 25 p. 492 



(Halmaheira). 

 There has been some confusion about the original Cancer brevis of 

 Herbst and the Macrophthalmus carinimanus of Milne-Edwards, owing to 

 the insufficient description of these authors. Indeed it is only after the 

 minute diagnosis of de Man, that the latter species became better known. 

 Hilgendorf (Baron v. d. Decken's Keisen in Ost-Afrika, Bnd. 3, 1869, 

 Crustacea, p. 86, pi. 3 f. 4) described and figured a specimen of MacropJUhalmus 

 under the name M. brevis and declared that this specimen exactly agreed 

 with Herbst's original specimen; he further united with it M. carinima- 

 nus, as Milne-Edwards himself, though with some hesitation, had suggested 

 already in 1852. Later, however, Hilgendorf changed his opinion as to 

 the identity of the two species (Monatsber. Ak. Wiss. Berlin, 1878, p. 806), 

 as he had acknowledged that the original specimen of Herbst was d i f- 

 ferent from his own specimens from East- Africa; the latter were now 

 designated under the name M. carinimanus. 



To decide this question I wrote to Prof. Yanhöffen of the Berlin 

 Zoological Museum to compare Herbst's specimen with the descriptions 

 of Hilgendorf and de Man, adding a drawing of the habitus of M. cari- 

 nimanus to my letter. Prof. Yanhöffen most obligingly informed me, 

 that the Cancer brevis indeed, except for some small differences, seemed 

 to be identical with M. carinimanus, so that the first name must have 

 the priority. The drawings of the lateral teeth of the carapace and of 

 cheliped of Herbst's original specimen, made by Prof. Yanhöffen with 

 the aid of the camera lucida and kindly placed at my disposal, have 

 fully convinced me of the correctness of Milne-Edwards's surmise. Hil- 

 gendorf 's specimens on the contrary belong to another species, which I 

 have named M. hilgendorfj. 



De Man (1880, p. 69) rightly remarked, that the species now under 

 discussion very much resembles M. dilatatus ; indeed, the conspicuous 

 granulation on the carapace and the verrucous tubercles on the bran- 

 chial regions occur in both species. In M. brevis (= 31. carinimanus) 

 however, the carapace is yet more transversely broadened ; the external 



