Full resolution (JPEG) - On this page / på denna sida - Sidor ...
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
Below is the raw OCR text
from the above scanned image.
Do you see an error? Proofread the page now!
Här nedan syns maskintolkade texten från faksimilbilden ovan.
Ser du något fel? Korrekturläs sidan nu!
This page has never been proofread. / Denna sida har aldrig korrekturlästs.
’W
ridinodez
Monop
Dolor
Macrocypridma
C y pr id i na
(sensu meo
et s str)
Siphonostra
Codonocera
As has been pointed out above, Monopia seems in a way to occupy a classificatory position
intermediate between Vargula and Cypridinodes, the last-mentioned of which is the most
aberrant type of these units. In spite of this, as is seen above, I have i eonsidered
it most convenient to distinguish the first-mentioned and the last-mentioned of these
three units from all the others as two sub-genera of a specific genus Monopia. u— It
may be mentioned in passing that C. Claus, 1873. p. 223 put forward the assumption that
Monopia flaveola might be rather closelv related
to J. D. Dana’s species Cypridina punctata
(J. D. Dana, 1852, pi. 91, fig. 2).
The sub-genus Doloria, on account of
the primitive type of the endopodite of
its male second antenna, seems to occupy
a certain excep tio nal position not only ti
Vargula, Macrocypridina, Cypridina (s. str.,
s. meo) and Siphonostra, but also to Monopia
and Cypridinodes. It seems to me rather
probable that it separated from the others before
the differentiation of Monopia-Cypridinodes.
In spite of this I have deemed it proper to
join it to the four first-mentioned of these
units on account of the great agreement that
it shows with these in all the other characters;
as is pointed out above, they åre all in this
treatise classified as sub-genera of one and the
same genus Cypridina.
The result of this investigation, which
— as has been pointed out above — merely on
account of the uncertainty and incompleteness
of the material can by no means be eonsidered
as certain, may be shown graphically in
sorae-thing like the following manner, fig. XXV.
With regard to the mutual relations of the different species within the genera it is, of
course, even more difficult to make any statement. — Even in those genera in which the
majority of the species have been described by G. W. MULLER, undoubtedly our foremost
Ustracod investigator, our knowledge of the’’species is rather limited on account of the
deficiencies of the diagnoses. In the present work I [have accordingly almost entirelv
refrained from drawing conclusions on this point.
Giq
Crossophorus
Fig. XXV.
Primitive C pprid t mnce
- The hypothetical pedigree uf
Uh-family Cypridininae.
Oecology of reproduction: — With regard to the phenomena of the oeeology of
reproduction in this sub-family nothing or practically nothing certain is known, nor can I contribute
muck towards the solution of this problem.
Position oj ihr
spreies.
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
