or absent. Maxilla 2, outer plate with pair of flattened crescentic frayed spines on end, inner plate with pair at end, a pair down inner margin. Finger of maxilliped palp blunt. Gnathopods 1 and 2 subchelate, dactylos with surface and both margins toothed; 5th segment strongly produced posterodistally. Peraeopods 3-5, 2nd segment somewhat expanded. Third urosome segment strongly keeled by telson-like structure, not roofing over telson. Uropods 1-3, rami slender, unequal. Telson entire.”

The more important differences from Cyproidea are in the maxilliped finger, the first antennae which are short and Lysianassid-like, the dactylos in the first and second gnathopods, the mandible palp and molar process, the expansion of the second segment in Pr. 3-5, and the non-roofing over of the telson by the urosome keel. A comparison with figures for Cyproidea serratipalma (Schellenberg, 1938, Fig. 9) will show most of these differences quite strikingly.

Schellenberg (1938) makes these corrections to Stebbing's diagnosis of Cyproidea: “1st urosome segment long, 2nd short, 3rd roofing over the telson in a vertical lamina, 2nd peduncle segment of antenna 1 dorsally produced, 2nd antenna backwardly displaced, its 3rd peduncle segment lengthened”. He deletes “molar wanting”.

This, as he suggests, effectively excludes Neocyproidea otakensis. I have therefore erected this new genus for N. otakensis (Chilton), Neocyproidea peninsulae, n.sp. and Neocyproidea pilgrimi, n. sp. The type of the genus is N. otakensis.