10 Rev. T. R. R. Stebbing on Amphvpodous Crustacea. Fig. 16. Diplograptus mticrmatus, Hall, with marginal fibres. Newham, near Lancefield. Fig. 17. DiplograpUis 7nitcronatics, Hall, with marginal fibres. Watchbox Ranges, near Baynton's. Fig. 18. DiplograpUis jjristis ?, Hisinger. Newham, near Lancefield. Tlio cellules are somewhat too distinctly represented in this figure. Fig. 19. Dichj7nograptus ? fruticosus, Hall. Oastlemaine, county of Tal-bot. Three only of the four stipes are here seen. Fig. 20. Didymograptus 7iitidus, Hall. Oastlemaine. Fig. 21. Didymograptus Fantmii?, M'Coy. Spring Plains, Redesdale. Showing the upper portion of two stipes. Fig. 22. Didymograpttis Pantoni ?, M'Coy. Spring Plains, Redesdale. Showing one stipe, and portion of the other, with radicle. Fig. 2.S. Graptolithus latus, M'Coy. Watchbox Ranges, near Baynton's. Fig. 24. Graptolithus tenuis ?, Portlock. Newham, near Lancefield. Note. — The figures are all di-awn as near as possible to the natural size. I am much indebted to my friend Mr. B. N. Peach for his careful delinea-tion of the specimens. II. — Amphipodous Crustacea. A neio Species^ and some Items of Description and Nomenclature. By the Rev. T. R. R. Stebbing, M.A. [Plates I. & IL] Liljehorgia Normanni^ n. sp. PL I. figs. 1, la, 1 J, 1 c. This species comes very near to Liljehorgia shetlandictty discovered by the Rev. A. M. Norman ; and I have taken the liberty of naming it in honour of that very distinguished car-cinologist. Both pairs of gnathopoda agree very closely with the figures and descriptions given by Bate and Westwood of members in L. slietlandica. In the first pair, however, the finger of the new species is longer, and has a serrated edge ; in the second pair the hand, instead of being only fringed with hair, is very prettily covered with it. The coxae of the fifth and sixth pairs of legs are deeper than those figured for L. slietlandica ; and the thighs of the fifth pair, instead of being equal to those of the sixth and seventh, are considerably smaller. The lenses of the eyes are not numerous, though the eyes are large — which accords with the description given of the genus, though the eyes of L. slietlandica are stated to be small. The magnitude of the eyes is in many species of sessile-eyed Crustacea a very variable character. The head has a rather deep slit below the lobe on which
BioStor
