PORCELLANOPAGURUS—BORRADAILE. 
I ID 
E. hernhardus (Fig. 10c) lias appendages of moderate size on the third, fourth, and fifth 
segments of the male. E. prideauxi (Fig. 10 d), however, shows only simple, micro¬ 
scopic vestiges of these limbs. It is interesting to note that in the male E. hernhardus 
the appendages in question are biramous with one branch reduced, but that this is the 
endopodite, whereas in the female of Porcellanopagurus it is the exopodite that has 
undergone reduction. Chilton describes the male of P. edwardsi, and as he makes no 
reference to any abdominal limbs save the uropods, it is probable that the latter alone 
are present. Balss, however, figuring what he states to be the male of P. japonic//s, 
shows three unequally biramous limbs on the same segments as in the female. It is 
A 
Fig. 10. —Dorsal views of the limb of the third abdominal segment in Eupagurinae— 
A, Porcellanopagurus, sp., 9 , X 6 ; B, Eupagurus bemliardus, J , x 5 ; C, the 
same, J , X 5 ; I>, Eupa,gurus prideauxi, £ , X 8. ex, Exopodite ; v, vestige of 
pleopod ; t, postero-external angle of tergum. 
possible that he may be mistaken in the sex of his specimen, but in that case it is 
to be observed that, as they are represented in his figure, the reduced rami appear to 
be the endopodites as in male E. hernhardus. If the male of P. japonicus lie rightly 
figured by Balss, then there is in Porcellanopagiirus a difference between species in 
regard to the development of the abdominal limbs of the male, as there is in Eupagurus. 
The question needs reinvestigation. 
The uropods (Fig. 6) of the two sexes are alike, and resemble those of the ordinary 
hermit-crabs, except in that they are almost completely symmetrical in shape and not 
very asymmetrical in position, though they are still obviously placed at an angle with 
