KUCHONE RUBROCINOTA. 285 
Habntat.—Dredged in the Zetlandic Seas by Dr. Gwyn Jeffreys and Canon Norman.! 
Unfortunately the example is fragmentary and nothing is known of the branchiz. The 
cephalic collar is fairly developed, with a deep fissure dorsally, the margin sloping thence 
downward and forward to the ventral process, a slight projection with a fissure between 
occurring on each side of the middle line. The body appears to be comparatively short, 
and the anal funnel is short antero-posteriorly and wide (Plate CXX, fig. 15), the margin 
being thin and deep, anteriorly with a shallow median notch, whilst the sides are boldly 
and somewhat regularly crenate for more than the anterior half. Its general aspect thus 
differs from that in Huchone analis. 
The anterior bristles are of two kinds, a longer series dorsally with finely tapered tips 
and narrow wings (Plate CXXXI, fig. 6), and those ventrally situated with broader wings 
and shorter tips (Plate CXXXI, fig. 6a). Posteriorly the tips of the bristles are greatly 
elongated, and the wings very narrow (fig. 6d). i 
The anterior hooks (Plate CXXXI, fig. 6b) have a long, curved shaft tapering to the 
base, whilst the neck is narrowed above the shoulder and curved backward. The main 
fang comes off nearly at a right angle, and about four teeth are on the crown above it in lateral 
view, whereas in Huchone analis the number of teeth is nearly doubled, and a differentiation 
of this region from that of the chief fang is evident. The posterior hooks are even more 
diagnostic than the anterior. The posterior outline (Plate CXXXI, fig. 6c) is convex, with 
a slight inflection below the crown, and a short posterior curve at the base, which is small. 
The great fang is long and sharp, and on the crown above it are six or seven distinct teeth. 
The anterior outline begins at a little less than a right angle, gently curves forward to the 
prow, which inferiorly blends with the short, truncate base. The lower part of the neck and 
body have curved strie. In structure, therefore, these hooks differ from those of EF. analis, 
Kroyer, and EL. papillosa, Sars. 
So far as can be observed, this form appears to be a variety of Huchone rubrocincta, 
but the details will be useful in coming to a decision in regard to the several species of Huchone, 
which at present need further study. 
M. Sars’ (1861) describes in Euchone papillosa a parasitic Copepod, Chonephilus dispar, 
with an elongated body, rounded or laterally compressed (female narrowed in front), the 
middle broader, thorax of four segments; the male broader anteriorly and thorax of six 
segments. Abdomen narrower than the thorax with five segments. Head separated from 
the thorax. Rostrum bifurcate. First antennee short, with five segments; first two segments 
dilated and spinous ; distal three flexed at a right angle with the former, bearing flagella 
or two membranaceous appendages, cylindrical uni-articulate, longer in the male, second 
pair foot-like, 4-articulate, distal segment with three hooks. Maxillipedes in females not 
seen; in male quadriarticulate, subcheliform, distal segment with a curved claw, three 
pairs of biramose triarticulate natatory feet. Fourth pair rudimentary, uniarticulate, a 
single, subglobose dorsal ovarian sac. 
It is difficult to know what the precise relations of Claparéde’s (1868) Dralychone is to 
Euchone and Chone. It appears to come very near the former, though Claparéde states that 
1 Ganon Norman and Dr. Gwyn Jeffreys did much valuable work with the dredge in the 
Zetlandic seas as well as elsewhere in British waters. 
* “Porhandl. Vidensk.-Selsk. Christ.,’ p. 140. 
