140 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, VoL VII, January, 1953 
of face and posteriorly beyond middle of 
palm, continued on inner face as much smaller 
triangular depressed area immediately below 
groove. Inferior margin with much deeper 
notch below upper groove, the proximal edge 
overhanging, the distal edge abrupt but 
rounded; notch continues more than 0.3 dis- 
tance up outer face with proximal edge well 
defined throughout but distal edge fading; 
depression on inner face similar to that on 
outer face but with both edges gradual. Dac- 
tylus 0.4 length of chela, heavy, with distal 
margin strongly curved. Scattered setae on 
superior margin and inner distal face of chela 
and on fingers. Merus about 0.25 as long as 
chela, twice as long as broad, superior distal 
margin obtuse and lacking inner distal tooth; 
with occasional setae along margins. Large 
chela of female similar. 
Small chela of male 3.4 times as long as 
broad, fingers 0.6 of total length. Palm com- 
pressed, without grooves, ridges, or depres- 
sions except for slight indentation at base of 
fixed finger. Both fingers curved distally so 
that points cross; both fingers with dense 
rows of marginal setae proximally, becoming 
more scattered distally; oppositional faces of 
both fingers somewhat flattened. Articulation 
of dactylus not flanked by tooth. Carpus with 
tooth extending over base of propodus. Me- 
rus similar in form to that of large chela. Small 
chela of female of same proportions and arma- 
ture as that of male except perhaps with few 
less setae proximally on fingers; size relatively 
less than that of male. 
Carpal articles of second legs with ratio 
10:8:3:3:5.5; second article of carpus 4.4 
times as long as broad; chela as long as first 
carpal article. 
Ischium of third legs with strong movable 
spine; merus 4 times as long as broad, taper- 
ing slightly distally, unarmed; carpus about 
0.5 as long as merus, neither superior nor in- 
ferior distal margin projecting distally as acute 
tooth; propodus 0.75 as long as merus, with 
II moderately large spines on inferior and dis- 
tal margins; dactylus acute, curved, simple. 
slightly shorter than width of merus. Merus 
with several short setae; superior margin of 
carpus and propodus with scattered, long 
setae. Brush on fifth legs well developed. 
Telson tapering only slightly in posterior 
third, anterior margins convex; 2.2 times as 
long as broad, maximum breadth 1.4 times 
breadth of tip. Margin of tip only slightly ar- 
cuate. Posterolateral spines feeble, scarcely 
reaching beyond rounded portion of tip; dor- 
sal spines heavy, 0.4 and 0.6 of distance from 
articulation to tip. Middle of posterior border 
and distolateral margin of inner uropod with 
small, irregularly placed spinules. 
Neotype about maximal size observed. 
Color in life, banded red and transparent, with 
blue-violet markings on appendages, especial- 
ly large chela. 
DISCUSSION: Although not as much varia- 
tion was noted in this species as in the closely 
related C crassimanus (Heller) the following 
points are noteworthy: The length of the sec- 
ond antennular article was as much as twice 
the length of the visible portion of the first in 
some smaller specimens; the sculpturing on 
the upper parts of both faces of the large chela 
varied in extent; the number of setae on the 
opposing faces of the fingers of the small 
chela also varied from the neotype, some hav- 
ing more, some less; the second article of the 
carpus of the second legs was almost as long 
as th^ first article in some specimens; and the 
number of spines on the propodus of the third 
legs varied slightly from the II found in the 
type specimen. In none of the specimens, 
however, was there a tooth on the merus of 
the large chela, nor at the articulation of the 
dactylus of the small chela; in no case was the 
proximal margin of the superior groove of the 
large chela other than overhanging the floor 
of the groove nor was the small chela of the 
males approaching the condition found in C. 
crassimanus (balaeniceps-shaped). ^ 
Dana’s original specimen, now lost, was 
very large, IM inches (or about 45 mm.), and 
was collected at some undesignated spot in 
the Hawaiian Islands. The neotype, the larg- 
