Cyclops. 
209 
somewhat narrower. My specimens agree with Herrick’s de¬ 
scription, except in the armature of the inner terminal seg¬ 
ment of first feet, and his statement is evidently inaccurate, for 
no normal armature would be as he describes it. 
C. parcus occurs in stagnant pools, and I have not found it 
-common. 
Cyclops leuckarti Sars. 
C 
Plate IV, fig. 17; plate V, figs. 2-6. 
C. leuckarti Sars ( 11 ), p. 239. 
“ simplex Poggenpol ( 14 ), p. 70, pi. XV, fig. 1-3. 
“ tenuicornis Uljanin ( 15 ), p. 30, pi. IX, figs. 12 and 13. 
“ leeuwenhoekii Hoek ( 16 ), p. 19, pi. Ill, figs. 1-12. 
“ simplex Rehberg ( 19 ), p. 542. 
“ “ Vosseler (28), p. 193, pi. IV, figs. 15-17. 
“ “ Herrick (30), p. 17, pi. VII, fig. 1, a-j. 
“ leuckarti Schmeil ( 37 ), p. 25. 
“ edax Forbes (35), p. 709, pi. Ill, fig. 15; pi. IV, figs. 
16-19. 
( C . scourfeldi Brady)? (36), p. 10, pi. IV, figs. 1-8. 
“ leuckarti Richard ( 39 ), p. 230, pi. VI, fig. 20. 
“ leuckarti Schmeil ( 41 ), p. 57, pi. Ill, figs. 1-8. 
This species was particularly abundant in the collections from 
Hake Puckaway. 
I have compared my specimens very carefully with the descrip¬ 
tions of the European form as given by Sars, Hoek and Schmeil, 
•and the correspondence is almost perfect. The only difference 
seems to be that the lower side of the second joint of the outer 
maxilliped is ordinarily crenulated rather than “ geperlte. ” Speci¬ 
mens from Heart Lake, however, have more minute crenulations 
to which the term “ geperlte' ’ would be more properly applied. 
But in other points there is perfect agreement, noticeably so in 
the toothed appendage of the last antennal joint. 
Schmeil states that the membrane of the last antennal seg¬ 
ment of the female has a single deep indentation. My speci- 
1863. 
1874. 
1875. 
1876. 
1880. 
1886. 
1887. 
1891. 
1891. 
1881. 
1891. 
1892. 
