166 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. XII, April, 1958 
ventrosus. Especially noteworthy are the fig- 
ures of the dactyli of the third to fifth legs 
(fig. 324, 325), a characteristic unique within 
the genus. Then Coutiere (1905: 882) re- 
ported, "L’examen des types de H. M. -Ed- 
wards ne permet aucun doute sur l’identite de 
X A. ventrosus et de l’espece ... A. laevis . . . 
Randall.” There appears, therefore, no ques- 
tion but that the two names refer to the same 
species. 
However, there is considerable question 
whether the form described as A. lottini by 
Guerin is this species. Milne-Edwards in his 
original description of A. ventrosus (1837: 353) 
concludes by saying, "L’Alphee de Lottin 
dont il a ete public une bonne figure, mais 
dont la description n’a pas encore paru [the 
named figure was published about 10 years 
before the printed description, and in the 
meantime Milne-Edwards published his work] 
parait etre tres-voisine de 1’espece precedete.” 
Stebbing (1915: 82) states, "But the descrip- 
tion of A. ventrosus does not seem to justify 
any claim for the priority of that name over 
Guerin’s A. lottini." He therefore used the 
name A. lottini. Barnard, in his work on the 
South African decapods (1950: 748, fig. 141), 
follows the name used by Stebbing. 
However, while Guerin’s description and 
figures do not show any great differences 
from the generalized description of Milne- 
Edwards, they do show differences from the 
form now recognized as A. ventrosus and from 
the types as re-examined by Coutiere. In 
Guerin’s figure, the rostrum in A. lottini 
reaches almost to the middle of the second 
antennular article, instead of to the distal 
part of the first article; the lateral spine of the 
scaphocerite is too prominent; the second 
article of the carpus of the second leg is about 
6 times as long as broad instead of 1.5 times; 
the dactyli of the third to fifth legs are shown 
as definitely acute. In the description, the 
wrist of the large chela is described as elon- 
gate and cylindrical, instead of short and 
cyathiform, and the articles of the posterior 
legs also as cylindrical instead of compressed. 
A most important difference is in the color, 
for the orange-red color of the specimens of 
this species is one of the most constant colors 
found in the family, yet Guerin figured it as 
a delicate lettuce green and described it, "Sa 
couleur est d’un jaune verdatre dans l’alkool.” 
It should be noted, too, that the figure does 
not show any orbital spines, yet Guerin re- 
ports these in his description. 
It is possible, of course, that these differ- 
ences are the result of inaccurate description 
and the types are actually identical; however, 
there is no reason to presume so, and until 
the time that Guerin’s types are found and 
redescribed, the name A. ventrosus should be 
accepted. If the types of Guerin should be 
found to be identical with the species of 
Milne-Edwards, I would recommend that the 
little-known and almost never used earlier 
name be suppressed by the International 
Commission on Zoological Nomencalture in 
favor of the long accepted name of this, one 
of the most common species of the genus. 
One other problem raised by Stebbing {loc. 
cit.) was concerned with the identity of the 
form that Bate called A. laevis Randall. "Bate’s 
figure of A. laevis in the ’Challenger’ report 
[1888: 555, pi. 99, fig- 3] cannot easily be 
reconciled with the species here in question.” 
It is true that Bate neither figured nor de- 
scribed the peculiar unguis of the third to 
fifth legs, and he depicted the legs, especially 
the second legs, as much too thin, but other- 
wise the specimen appears to agree with A. 
ventrosus. Moreover, Bate’s specimen came 
from Hawaii, and, as with Randall’s specimen, 
there are no other species in Hawaii that agree 
even moderately well with the description and 
figures. It should be noted, also, that Bate 
shows dark spots on the superior surface of 
the large and small chelae, a characteristic of 
the species (cf. Banner, 1953: fig. 28 c, d, e). 
The last question that might arise is whether 
the species identified by Stebbing and Bar- 
nard from South Africa as A. lottini is the same 
as A. ventrosus. Stebbing’s brief description 
leaves little room for doubt, and Barnard’s 
