Page:VCH Lancaster 1.djvu/212

 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE an interesting member of the burrowing family Callianassids, Upogebia deltaura (Leach), on the faith of Mr. Andrew Scott's account that 'An ahnost perfect specimen of this curious lobster-Hke crustacean, measuring two inches in length, was found in the stomach of a haddock caught on the off-shore station between Lancashire and the Isle of Man, 13 March, 1901. The Upogebia had evidently just been swallowed by the fish, as it was perfectly fresh, and the gastric juices had not had time to act upon the carapace." Another crustacean, which must be rather credited to the district than to any particular spot of tenancy, is the common sea crawfish, Palinurus vulgaris (Latreille). This has a kind of antiquarian interest; for when Dr. Leigh, as already quoted, in discussing the inhabitants of these waters, remarks that ' the Oyster and Lobster are very common,' and goes on to speak of prawns and shrimps, the oyster seems to be unaccountably introduced into very inappropriate company. It happens, however, that Borlase, in his Natural History of Cornwall, has supplied the same combination, but in a more intelligible and explanatory fashion. He compares the 'Long Oyster (the Locusta marina Aldrovandi de Crustat. chap. 2, tab. 2) ' with the lobster,^ and, to make the explanation still more satisfactory, we find Conrad Gesner at a much earlier date writing ' Ostreorum nomen, ut abunde explicavimus, non raro com- muniter genus totum testatorum complectitur.' ' Hence we may safely infer that the oyster, or long oyster, when compared by old writers with the lobster, signifies not the well-known mollusc, but the marine crawfish, which is distinguished from the lobster by much brighter colouring, much less powerful front feet, larger mandibles, and the spiny peduncles of its long and strong second antenns. As for Astacus gammarus (Linn.), the common lobster, so often erroneously called Homarus vulgaris, it is interesting to note once more that Dr. Leigh speaks of it as ' very common,' whereas Byerley makes the rather surprising statement, ' Many years since one of this species was caught at Hilbre by Mr. C. Robin. Some of the oldest fishermen remember that they were formerly caught there, but very rarely, as well as many other creatures now no longer found, the ledges between the rocks being silted up with sand and affording less harbour.'* The implication is that in 1854 the lobster had ceased to belong to the known fauna of Liver- pool. That this loss has since been repaired may be judged from Mr. Andrew Scott's chapter 'On the Spawning of the Common Lobster,' in which he says, ' The usual process by which the eggs of the common lobster of the British coasts are shed and conveyed to the swimmerets appears to have been hitherto unknown. The following notes based on observation made at the Piel Hatchery may therefore be of interest.' As to the interest there can indeed be no question, but the whole account is too long for quotation ; only one or two points may here be mentioned. ' As the eggs leave the oviducts they become coated with an adhesive substance which causes them to stick together and to the swimmerets. The period of oviposition in the lobster under observation was just over four hours.' The eggs when extruded are quite soft, of an opaque dark green colour, with a thin transparent shell. They were i-8 millimetres, or a fourteenth of an inch, in diameter.' 3 '^'"''J I-i^^rro^l BkL Soc XV. 345 (1901). 8 Op. cit. p. 27. (,758). s De Aiu.u.:bus, p. 653 (1 5 58, Edition 1604). * Fluna ofLwJ^), 52. ' Trans. Lwerp. Biol. Sic. xvii. 106 (1903). 160