CRUSTACEA.
B y V. N. U l ia n in .
The following pages contain the results of the examination of part|nf
the Crustacea collected by Fedchenko, viz., Amphipoda, Isopoda, Copepoda,
Phyllopoda, and Cladocera. Ostracoda will form the subject ot
another part of the “ Travels in Turkestan.”
The Copepoda Fedchenko proposed to treat himself, and consequently
devoted special attention to creatures of this order. During
his travels he, whenever possible, submitted the specimens of this order
that he collected to a more or less detailed preliminary investigation.
To such preliminary, but in the majority of cases very minute, investigation
were also submitted all species of the genus Cyclops collected
by him. There only remained for me to verify his remarks, m part to
complete them, and prepare from them the descriptions of the species of
that genus furnished by myself. In this I have received great assistance
from the beautiful and remarkably detailed drawings of entire specimens
of Cyclops and also of many details, prepared from fresh specimens, by
Madame Fedchenko, under the supervision of her husband.
[These drawings are added in the original.— H. L.~]
I have endeavoured to compile the present list as a handbook, with
synoptical tables. With the aid of these tables, the distinguishing
marks of the new forms described by me, and of forms previously defined,
are easily seen. { , ,
In all there are 51 species enumerated in the present volume (2
Amhhiboda, 9 Isopoda, 17 free-living Copepoda, 2 parasitic Copepoda,
2 Phyllopoda, and 19 Cladocera), of which 17 are new (1 Amphipoda,
7 Isopoda, 8 Copepoda, and 1 Cladocera). Doubtless there is to be
found in Turkistan a much larger number of species of Crustacea, and
much remains to be done by future investigators of that country to
complete the present list. .
The land Crustacea are represented m the collection by only one
genus Porcellio, the multitudinous species of which are, as is known,
scattered over the world. It is very probable that in Turkistan there
are to be found certain other genera of Porcellionidce very common m
Europe (viz., Ligidium, Philoscia, and Platyarthrus), which are dis;
tributed over the whole of Central and'Southern European Russia. The
absence of species of these genera in Fedchenko’s collection may easily
be explained, partly by the mode ofjife of creatures related to these
genera (species of the genera Philoscia and Ligidium always live
solitarily and somewhat concealed), and partly from their small size
(Platyarthrus). . .
Neither one cause nor the other is sufficient to explain the absence trom
theTurkistan collection of the genera Armadillidium and Armadillo
the first of which inhabits the whole of Central (part of Northern) and
Southern Europe, the second being principally distributed over South
Europe. The species of the two above-named genera always attain a
considerable size, and are always found in large numbers dispersed over
limited areas. The consequence is that in localities inhabited by
the species of these genera, some of the first are always caught by
the collector, and they are always represented in collections by
numerous specimens. The absence of representatives of these genera
in the Turkistan collection appears to me, therefore, a very weighty
evidence that they really do not inhabit Russian Central Asia. The
absence of the genera Armadillidium and Armadillo from the Turkistan
fauna is also partly confirmed by their distribution in other
countries. The species of the genus Armadillidium in the west
of Europe extend tolerably far towards the north ; many of them are
found in the'northern part of the British Isles, in North Germany,
Denmark, and even in Southern Sweden. As we advance towards
the east the northern limit of distribution of genus Armadillidium
trends rapidly southwards, and within the limits of European Russia, so
far as I can judge from my rather extensive collection of Porcellionidae,
it does not extend beyond the north of Kief and the neighbouring
provinces.
As regards the species of the genus Porcellio, found in Turkistan,
they decidedly ought to be added to the number of the species living
in the so-called Mediterranean region. Of the two species found by
Fedchenko in Turkistan, which had been already described, one (Pore,
ornatus, M.-E.) was previously found in the environs of Carthagena, and
the other (Pore, laevis, Latr.}, though it is also distributed over the whole
of Gentral Europe as is shown by me in its place, principally belongs
to Southern Europe, where only it attains its full development. The
Turkistan specimens are similar to those dwelling in Southern Europe
along the shores of the Mediterranean and neighbouring seas, and are,
like these, distinguished from the Central European forms by the constantly
larger size, and also by certain constant differences in the
colouring of the body. . Of the species of Porcellio described by me
as new, Pore. Fedchenkoi is extremely like that, described by Brandt,
from Southern European Russia (Pore. P a lla sii) ; Pore, elegans is
extremely like that inhabiting the Trans-Caucasus and Persia (Pore.
K lugii, Bdt.), and that common in the whole of North Africa (Pore.
Reaumurii, Aud.); Pore, maracandicus is very near that described
from Andalusia (Pore, glaber, Koch); Pore, asiaticus is doubtless
allied to that described from South Europe by Stein (Pore, longicor-
nis). The foregoing considerations, together with the fact that the
forms foreign to the Mediterranean province, though very common over
the whole of Central Europe including Central European Russia (Pore,
convexus, Dg., Pore, scaber, Bdt., Pore, pictus, Bdt.), are not found in
Turkistan, induce me to characterize the land fauna of Crustacea as
not very different from that of the Mediterranean province.
It is almost impossible to treat in a satisfactory manner the freshwater
fauna of Crustacea, not only because the materials collected by
Fedchenko constitute only a certain proportion of all the Crustacea
dwelling in fresh-water in Turkistan, but also in consequence of the
paucity of materials for comparison. The fresh-water Crustacea of only
very few parts of Europe have been investigated at all completely.
Fedchenko, during his travels, found no species of Astacus