Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T07:16:44.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

XIV.—On Ostracoda collected by H. B. Brady, Esq., LL.D., F.R.S., in the South Sea Islands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

Extract

Excepting the few species noticed in the Report on the Ostracoda of the “Challenger” Expedition, scarcely anything, so far as I know, has been published respecting the Ostracoda of the South Sea Islands. Prof. G. M. Thomson has indeed published in the Transactions of the New Zealand Institute (1878), a paper on Crustacea, which includes a few marine and fresh-water Ostracoda of New Zealand; and the Rev. R. L. King, in the Proceedings of the Royal Society of Van Diemen's Land (1855), described numerous species of Entomostraca, amongst which were several fresh-water, but no marine, Ostracoda. Dr Baird also published a species of Cypridina from New Zealand. I have myself contributed to the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1886) a paper on Entomostraca collected in South Australia, chiefly by Professor Ralph Tate of Adelaide, including a considerable number of fresh-water Ostracoda; and in a French publication (Les Fonds de la Mer), edited by the Marquis de Folin, there are likewise, by myself, descriptions of a few species taken at Nouméa, New Caledonia. There are also, in a paper of mine published in the Transactions of the Zoological Society (1865), notes of a few Australian marine species. This, I think, represents the sum of our present knowledge respecting the Ostracoda of these regions.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1890

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 489 note * Except once in Herm, by the Rev. Dr Norman.

page 493 note * The single specimen from which the species was first described was unfortunately lost by the draughtsman who made the drawings, but these Samoan shells seem to agree almost exactly with the description, and I have but little hesitation in referring them to the same species.

page 496 note * Trans. Royal Dublin Soc, vol. iv. Series II. p. 110Google Scholar.

page 496 note † These anatomical details being taken from dried specimens, were not easily made out, and the number of joints here given differs from that of the Royal Dublin Society Memoir. I think the present enumeration is correct.

page 508 note * The figures here given are taken from a specimen of extreme tumidity, but which seems to possess no characters sufficient to separate it from the ordinary form.

page 513 note * πλέος, full; οχισμὴ, a cleft.