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.
C. porrecta. (In the small speeimens described by me above this bristle was always somewhat
longer: it reached in most cases to about the middle of the first joint of this limb. — The
state-ments about this character varv in the literature, but the certainty of these statements is doubtful,
so that I do not think it convenient to deal with it at any length in this connection.)
Do C. spinirostris and C. porrecta represent two well differentiated forms; is the
identification carried out by G. W. MÜLLER unjustified?
It seems to me not improbable that these questions must be answered in the affirmative;
if this is the case, then it is clear that my specimens from S. A. E., PI. station 4 b and the
larger specimens of G. W. MüLLER’s species C. spinirostris, 1906 a, belong to C. porrecta.
A definite answer to this problem is, however, not possible at present. A renewed investigation
carried out on abundant material would be necessary before it could be given.
( )n account of this state of uncertainty it did not seem to me proper to include the naine
of C. spinirostris, G. W. MÜLLER, 1906 a, nor the same nanie in this investigator’s works of
1906 b, 1908 and 1912 in my list of synonyms.
The only one of the other writers who has accepted the synonymization C. spinirostris
- (’. porrecta is Til. Scott, 1912 a.
G. S. BRADY, 1902 a, p. 199 (= 1903, pp. 338 and 339) and V. Vävra, 1906, state that
they have found C. porrecta, but unfortunately these writers give neither description nor figures.
V. Vävra, who states that he found this species — only female specimens — at no less than
fifteen of the stations of the „Plankton Expedition“, only writes „diese leicht erkenntliche Art“,
an expression that is presumably taken direct from C. Claus’s original description.
G. H. Fowler, 1909, takes C. porrecta as „Stage I“ of C. spinirostris. Only two specimens,
two males, of the first-mentioned form were found in the material in question. Both these
specimens had shells 1,3 mm. long. The e-bristle on the first, antenna was characterized by
„16 pairs of saw-like teeth, followed by about 11 pairs of spine-teeth; the latter so
markedly alternate as to suggest a single row unless viewed directly from above“; there were
consequently 16 pairs of „saw-like teeth“ and a row of 22 „spine-teeth“, i. e. about the
same number as was found by C. CLAUS, G. W. MÜLLER and me. For other characters see the
work in question, p. 252. Cf. also in this matter p. 565 above.
The only writer who lias followed this procedure of G. H. Fowler’s is L. SCHWEIGER,
1912. This writers says (p. 266) that he followed G. H. Fouler and not G. W. Müller „weil
mir vereinzelte Stadium II untergekommen sind, die aber doch im Verhältnis gestreckte Formen
waren, und umgekehrt Formen von I, die aber weniger gestreckt als die vorher erwähnten waren.“
No length is given for the ,,porrecta stage“; the males of the ,,spinirostris stage“ would have
attained a length of 1,02—1,3 mm. and the females 1,12—1,5 mm. The work, which is
characterized by a certain amount of uncertainty, lias no other information that is of any interest in
connection with this problem.
C. spinirostris, V. VÄVRA, 1906, has not been included in the above list of synonyms
because this writer states that the females of this species investigated by him had a dorsal bristle
on the second joint of the first antenna: „mit sehr feiner, gewöhnlich dem Frontalorgan eng
anliegender Dorsalborste, so daß dieselbe von einigen Autoren übersehen wurde“; in plate I,
<< prev. page << föreg. sida << >> nästa sida >> next page >>
