202 Part III. —Hleventh Annual Report 
scarcely possible they can be the same species. In Sunaristes the genital 
segment of the female abdomen is equal to the entire length of the other 
abdominal segments, the ovisacs are elongate ovate, somewhat pointed at 
both ends, and reach to the end of the abdomen ; the buccal appendages 
and swimming feet also differ. Further, when describing the habitat of 
Sunarestes he says, loc. cit., ‘Sont les compagnons intimes des Pagures, et 
‘e’est avec la plus grande peine qu’on peut les en séparer, non qu/ils 
‘ soient fixés sur eux comme le sont leurs parasites, mais par leur adresse 
‘ace cacher dans J’intérieure on en dessous des coquiiles que ceuxci 
‘habitent.’ But Canuella is free-living like Longipedia. Specimens both 
of Paguri and their shells have been examined without obtaining a single 
specimen of Canuella ; all our specimens have been obtained in dredged 
material, or with hand-net, along with Longipedia and other free-living 
species. In 1884 Dr Wilhelm Miiiler described * a large copepod he also 
had obtained living as a messmate with a species of Paguwri | Pagurus 
(Eupagurus) bernhardus|, and which he named Longipedina pagurt. 
This may be the same species as that described by Hesse as Sunaristes 
paguri, but if so the description and figures of the one certainly differ 
very widely from those of the other. 
Longipedina pagurt, W. Miiller, has even a closer resemblance to 
Canuella than Sunaristes has, but there are still important differences— 
Longipedina is twice the size of Canuella, its length, exclusive of tail sete, 
being, as stated by Miiller, 2-7 mm. It is a messmate with Pagurus 
bernhardus, while Canuella is free-living. The second pair of swimming 
feet in the male are different from those of the female, but in Canwella 
they are alike in both sexes. 
‘After a careful study of the descriptions and figures of Sunaristes and 
‘ Longipedina, we find that’ . . . . . ‘the difference, both in respect 
‘ of structure and habitat, between each of these and the species described 
‘ by us, is apparently so great that we prefer for the present to consider 
‘the Forth species as distinct.’ 7 
Zosime, Boeck (1872). 
Zosime typrca, Boeck. (Pl. V. figs. 14-17.) 
1872. Zosime typica, Boeck, ‘ Nye Slegter og Arter af Saltvands- 
‘Copepodar,’ p. 14. 
1880. Zosime typica, Brady, ‘ Mon. Brit. Cop.,’ vel. i. p. 15, 
pl. xxxix. figs. 1-12. 
Habitat.—In material dredged off Musselburgh, frequent. The Forth 
specimens of this interesting and well-marked species agree thoroughly in 
structural details with the description and figures in ‘ British Copepoda.’ 
The structure and armature of the first pair of swimming feet and of the 
female fifth pair are characters by which the species is readily distin- 
guished. 
Genus Jonesiella, Brady (1880). 
Jonesiella hyenx, I. C. Thompson. (Pl. III. figs. 1-6). 
1889. Jonesiella hyenx, I. C. Thompson, ‘Proc. Biol. Soc. 
‘Liverpool,’ vol. viii. p. 193, pl. ix. figs, 1-10. 
This rather peculiar and interesting species was obtained among dredged 
material collected near Eyebrough Rock—a short distance west of Fidra 
* Archiv fiir Naturg., jahrgung 50, 1st Band, p. 19. 
t+ Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist. (April 1893), p. 94. 
