Go to National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa
Volume 38, 1905
This text is also available in PDF
(316 KB) Opens in new window
– 267 –

Amphipoda.

Amaryllis macropthalmus, Haswell. Amaryllis macrophithalmus, Haswell, Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., iv, p. 253; Cat. Aust. Crust., p. 227. Amaryllis brevicornis, Haswell, l.c., p. 254; Cat. Aust. Crust., p. 228. Glycerina affinis, Chilton, l.c., ix, p. 2, pl. xlvii, fig. 1, a and b. Amaryllis macrophthalmus, Stebbing, “Challenger,” Amphipoda, p. 706, pl. xxix. Amaryllis macrophthalmus, Thomson, Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist., 7, x, p. 463; Index Faunæ N.Z., p. 258.

A single specimen, a female with eggs, from Channel Islands, 25 fathoms, undoubtedly belongs to this species. The species is a widely distributed one. Haswell records it from Tasmania,

– 268 –

Port Jackson and other localities on the east coast of Australia; while the “Challenger” specimen was obtained off Cape Virgins, Patagonia, at a depth of 55 fathoms. Glycerina affinis, Chilton, which was described under a misapprehension as to its generic position, is a synonym of this species.

Mr. G. M. Thomson has recorded this species from Mokohinau and from Lyttelton.

Ampelisca chiltoni, Stebbing. Index Faunæ N.Z., p. 260, and Report “Challenger,” Amphipoda, p. 1042.

One imperfect specimen dredged off Great Barrier Island, at a depth of 120 fathoms, appears to belong to this species. I have also two specimens dredged off the Poor Knights Islands, in 60 fathoms, and two others collected in Kaipara Harbour by Dr. Cockayne, that certainly belong to it.

The “Challenger” specimens were collected at station 167, to the west of New Plymouth, in 150 fathoms.

Ampelisca acinaces, Stebbing. Index Faunæ N.Z., p. 260; Thomson, Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist., 7, x, p. 464.

Some specimens from Bay of Islands, 4 fathoms, given me by Dr. Cockayne, belóng, I think, to this species. They can be distinguished from A. chiltoni most readily by the dorsal compression, which is continued along the whole length of the body, whereas in A. chiltoni it is not at all well marked, and is limited to the head. Many minute points of difference are given by Mr. Stebbing, but if my identifications are correct some of these will not hold: e.g., the inferior posterior angles of the 3rd segment of the pleon are produced into an acute slightly upturned point, just as in A. chiltoni, while Mr. Stebbing describes and figures the lower margin as nearly straight, and making a right angle with the hind margin; and again, in my specimens the lower antennæ are considerably less than the length of the body and shorter than in A. chiltoni, while Mr. Stebbing gives them about equal to the length of the body in A. acinaces, and his figure of A. chiltoni shows them considerably less than that of the body, although in his description of the species he says, “antennæ nearly as in Ampelisca acinaces.”

The “Challenger” specimens were taken off Port Jackson in 35 fathoms. According to Mr. Thomson, this species is not infrequently washed up on Ocean Beach, Dunedin, in considerable numbers.

Leucothoë tridens, Stebbing. “Challenger” Reports, xxix, p. 777; Index Faunæ N.Z., p. 258.

Two imperfect specimens, Channel Islands, 25 fathoms, appear to belong to this species.