200 



Part III. -Eleventh, Annual Report 



Longipedia eoronata, var. minor, T. and A. Scott. (PI. II. figs. 14-20.) 

 1893. Longipedia eoronata, var. minor, T. and A. Scott, 'Ann. 



Scot. Nat. Hist.,' vol. ii. pt. 2, p. 93. 

 1882. (?) Longipedia eoronata, Giesbrecht, toe. cit. 



Length from apex of rostrum to end of caudal stylets, exclusive of tail 

 setae, '82 mm. (one-thirtieth of an inch). Female — anterior and posterior 

 antennae and mouth organs similar to those of Longipedia eoronata, but 

 smaller. Male — anterior antennae short and robust, much less setiferous 

 than those of the female, hinged between the third and fourth joints, 

 terminal joint forming a comparatively small and curved claw-like 

 appendage (fig. 15). First pair of swimming feet somewhat similar to 

 those of Longipedia eoronata, but smaller. The second pair in the 

 female differ from those of Longipedia coronal a in the following particulars : 

 — The outer branch is considerably longer in proportion to the inner 

 branch, the end of the second joint in the one reaching to about the end 

 of the second joint in the other ; and the long third joint of the inner 

 branches is only about one and a half times the length of the outer 

 branches ; and the spine on the outer aspect of the long third joint is 

 situated between the two spines on the inner aspect, but nearer to the 

 proximal one (fig. 16). The exterior spine on the long third joint 

 is wanting in the male ; the outer branch of the second pair of the 

 male is also somewhat proportionally shorter than in the female (fig. 17). 

 The other swimming feet are nearly similar to those of Longipedia 

 eoronata, but are rather smaller. The fifth pair in the female differ con- 

 siderably from those of Longipedia eoronata in the form of the secondary 

 branch (or joint). This branch is elongate and narrow (fig. 18), the greatest 

 breadth being only equal to about one-fourth of the length ; and also, 

 though the var. minor is little more than half the length of the (supposed) 

 typical form, the length of the secondary branch of its fifth foot is greater 

 than that of the other. This difference may be indicated in another way 

 — i.e., in Longipedia eoronata the length of the secondary branch of the 

 fifth foot is scarcely equal to one-fourteenth of the entire length of the 

 animal, but in Longipedia eoronata, var. minor, the length of the 

 secondary branch is equal to one-eighth of the length of the animal. In 

 the male the fifth pair are small, and the basal joint is proportionally 

 rather more developed than in the female ; the secondary branch is rather 

 broader and shorter; and the interior spiniform basal seta is straight, and 

 considerably shorter than in the female (fig. 20).' The appendages of the 

 first abdominal segment in the male are nearly as large as the basal part 

 of the fifth feet, and are furnished with three seta?. The central one of 

 the three marginal spines of the last abdominal segment is not so large 

 proportionally, and the apical setae of the caudal stylets are much longer 

 than in Longipedia eoronata (fig. 19). One ovisac. Frequent in dredged 

 material from Largo Bay and off Musselburgh. This is certainly not the 

 form described as Longipedia eoronata (male) in the monograph of the 

 British Copepoda ; neither does it appear to agree with that described by 

 Claus, except in the arrangement of the spines on the last elongate joint 

 of the inner branch of the second pair of swimming feet, but it agrees in 

 size and in structural details with that described by Giesbrecht in his 

 account of the free living Copepoda of Kiel fiord. 



Genus Canuetla, T. and A. Scott. 



'Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.,' 1893. 

 Longipedia, Brady (in part). 



Somewhat like Longipedia roron<da, Claus ; but the inner branches of 

 the second pair of swimming feet are not longer than the outer branches. 



