504 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. XXII, October 1968 
identification: Specimens agree well with 
the description of Barnard (1959), showing 
only a few minor points of difference. Unlike 
type material, the carpopodite of the first male 
peraeopod has the posterior distal angle pro- 
duced into a broad process which constricts 
about halfway along its length into a narrow, 
blunt-ending, inward curved tooth, which does 
not reach to the tip of the propopodite, and in 
this respect resembles specimens collected in the 
open sea off Newport, California (Barnard, 
1961^). In addition, the carpopodite of the 
second male peraeopod is somewhat more elong- 
ated than in type material, the propopodite of 
the first female peraeopod is scarcely expanded 
distally, and the telson in both sexes bears both 
spines and setae on its distal margin. The maxi- 
mum size of males in the collections is 3.0 mm, 
that of the females, 3.5 mm. 
distribution: Present material comes from 
Costa Rica (Playa Blanca and Cocos Bay), that 
of Barnard (1959, 1961^) from Newport Bay, 
California. 
Amphideutopus oculatus Barnard 
Barnard, J. L. 1959. Contr. Allan Hancock 
Fdn. Occas. Paper 21, pp. 34-35, pi. 10. 
Fig. 5 d-e 
IDENTIFICATION: Specimens do not differ to 
any great extent from those described by Barnard 
(1959). The maximum size of males in the 
collections is 8 mm, as compared with 4.5 mm 
for the male holotype. 
distribution: Present material came from 
the Gulf of California (Tiburon Island) and 
Costa Rica (Salinas Bay), that of Barnard 
(1959) from Newport Bay. 
Fig. 5. Neomegamphopus roosevelti Shoemaker, bahia Honda, panama. $: a-c, f, peraeopod 1. 
Amphideutopus oculatus Barnard, tiburon island, California. $ : d, peraeopod 1. salinas bay, costa 
rica. $ : e, peraeopod 2. 
