of Edinburgh, Session 1884-85. 
283 
by the dredge (1600 fathoms) ; the small fins are in marked contrast 
to those of pelagic species, while the small suckers and delicate 
tentacles are equally little fitted for raptorial purposes ; hut, on the 
other hand, the large circumoral lip would seem well suited for 
collecting nutritive matters from an oozy bottom. 
A new genus has also been erected for the reception of another 
interesting Decapod, Promachoteuthis megaptera (vide postea ), and a 
third for a specimen nearly allied to the genus Histioteuthis, which 
was obtained in the South Atlantic (Station 333) ; the web is very 
small in comparison with that of this genus, not extending quite 
half-way to the tips of the arms. In the present state of our know- 
ledge it seems impossible to refer this form to any type hitherto 
described, and it has therefore been erected into a new genus under 
the name Histiojpsis atlantica. 
Among the Challenger Collection is also one mutilated individual 
of Taonius hyperboreus, Stp., a species hitherto known only from 
examples in the Copenhagen Museum •* there are also two medium 
sized specimens and a small one, which appear to be referable to the 
same genus. It is remarkable that many of the most interesting 
specimens are mere fragments ; among others may be mentioned 
part of a tentacle of Mastigoteuthis Agassizii, Yerrill, which was 
found adhering to the dredge rope, and numerous pieces of a long 
gelatinous pen, taken from the stomach of a shark ; these latter 
seem to resemble nothing hitherto known so nearly as the pen of 
Chiroteuthis lacertosa, Yerrill, f though, if this determination be 
correct, that species must sometimes attain a length of several feet. 
I append definitions of the new species contained in the collec- 
tion : — 
MYOPSIDiE. 
Promachoteuthis, Hoyle. 
Promachoteuthis, Hoyle, Harr. Chall. Exp., vol. i. part 2, p. 270, fig. 109, 
1885. 
The Body is short, rounded, with large broad fins , situated 
* The specimen which Yerrill figures {Trans. Connect. Acad., vol. v. p. 302, 
pi. xxvii. figs. 1, 2, 1882) is certainly not Taonius hyperboreus, Stp. I have 
elsewhere adduced arguments for believing it to be Taonius pavo (Les.), ( Proc . 
Roy. Phys. Soc. Pd in., vol. viii. p. 319, 1885). 
t Loc. cit., p. 408, pi. lvi. figs. 1 a, a', a", 1881. 
VOL. XIII. 
u 
