LIBRARY ’ OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. RECEIVED BY EXCHANGE Class (a ails aera LS WI pee MORTENSEN: ay sr PUBLISHED AT THE COST OF THE GOVERNMENT is oa | td ae 7 . R OF THE ZOOLOGICAL MUSEUM OF THE UNIVERSITY. ~ TH. MORTENSEN. CiBaAR Sf OF THE ( UNIVERSITY . $p0 OR CALIFORIS PRINTED BY ‘BIANCO LUNO. 1907 - i Ready from the Press November the 12‘ CONTENTS. Echinoidea. Page ; Page RASA al phate sone 5 ech oe Hig tipieraeaae SMM + 0 eV ood ws 3. Aéropsis rostrata (Wyv. Thoms.)...............-.... go. mupotder Clypeastroided 300. oe bets eo cieaa eels kee ess 28. Hemiaster expergitus Lovén ....................2.. 97. eT RINE ER ES Sok "5 2 oe walkin Minho elo We ws oc under- stand how a statement, shown to be erroneous, can be made good again by simply reiterating it, even if this is done by so eminent an authority as Professor Agassiz. The statement that I use the spicules in the classification of the Echinothurids, after having «previously informed us» that they «are of no systematic value» must be due to some error. So far . as I know I have never stated that the spicules are of no systematic value. On p. 45 I have said that «the spicules are almost always rather large, irregular, fenestrated plates situated more or less distinctly in 3—4 longitudinal series. In A. var7wm, Grubet, heteractis and urens they are very slightly developed, only small, branched calcareous pieces, rarely with a hole». In the following lines I say of the sphzeridiz that they «show no differences so great that they can be of any systematic importance». Perhaps it is this remark which Professor Agassiz through some lapsus has referred to the spicules. The difference between the genera Ave@osoma and Calveria is, | agree, not so very important, and since the name Calveria cannot be used, as pointed out by Professor Agassiz and most carefully argued by Dr. F. A. Bather', it may, perhaps, be preferable to unite C. hystrix with the genus Are@osoma,; to the genus Asthenosoma it cannot be referred. The species A. varium and Grube I have never referred to the genus Calveria, as stated-by Agassiz (p. 84). & ‘Professor Agassiz claims to have figured an ophicephalous pedicellaria of «Phormosoma» lu- culentum, viz. on Pl. XLIV. fig. 27 of the «Challenger»-Echinoidea. I may remark on this account that he only mentions it in the explanation of the plates and under the name «small short-headed, short-stemmed pedicellaria»; further I have by no means overlooked that figure, but mention it on p. 60 and p. 176, suggesting that it may represent an ophicephalous pedicellaria, but stating that I have myself been unable to find any similar form of pedicellaria in this species. I think Professor Déderlein is right in supposing (Op. cit. p. 121) that it does not really belong to this species. When Professor Agassiz takes the peculiar modified form of tridentate (or perhaps ophicephalous) pedicellarize figured by me on Pl. XIII. Fig. 16 to be the same as that which he has figured in Pl. XLIV. 25—26 («Challenger>- Echinoidea), he is quite right. I have stated that carefully on p. 60 and have given no figures of the valves, finding that his figures «give a good representation of the single valve». That figures of Phormosoma placenta are given in the «Blake»-Echini and of Phormosoma bursarium in the «Challenger»-Echini does not eliminate the fact, that Professor Agassiz in describing the latter species only points out the differences from the distantly related «Phormosoma» luculentum but not the characters distinguishing it from the very closely related Ph. placenta. Neither are such characters pointed out under Phormosoma placenta in the «Blake»-Echinoidea. That there was some reason for pointing out such differences appears also from the fact that Professor Déderlein is now inclined to regard Ph. bursariwm as only a synonym of PA. placenta (Op. cit. p. 127). Further, Professor Agassiz says (p. 85): «Dr. Mortensen thinks that I am wholly mistaken in suggesting any affinity between A. pellucidum and A. coriaceum and A. tesselatum, because? he has suggested a new genus, Hoplosoma, for A. pellucidum, based entirely upon the structure of the pedi- 1 The Echinoderm name Ca/veria hystrix, Ann. Nat. Hist. 7. Ser. XVII. 1906. p. 249. 2 The Italics are mine. PS ee ee ne ee ee ae a ECHINOIDEA. II. 21 cellariz; they are certainly very peculiar, but may be embryonic conditions of unknown pedicellarize similar to those he figures for Ph. placenta. As for his remarks on Phormosoma tenue, 1 would suggest to Dr. Mortensen that the Report on the «Challenger»-Echini was issued in 1881, and that his memoir was published in 1903; he can scarcely expect genera proposed in 1903 to have received any recogni- tion in 1881». It is possible that the genus Hafalosoma (not Hoplosoma) cannot be maintained, in which case the only species, pellucidum, would have to be referred to the genus Av@osoma, since its peculiar glo- biferous pedicellariz are evidently only a special development of the «tetradactylous» pedicellarize of - the latter genus, as shown by Dr. de Meijere. That they are not embryonic conditions of unknown pedicellarize is certain; otherwise, fully developed forms would also have been found among the not very few specimens seen by me, and Dr. de Meijere especially would have found them in the very rich material he has had for study. Whether now the genus Hapalosoma has to be maintained (as I _think it has) or not, I certainly did not deny the close affinity of A. pellucidum with A. coriaceum and ¢esselatum because I suggested a separate genus for the former, but, on the contrary, I suggested a new genus for it, because I found it too distantly related to A. coriaceum and tessclatum to refer it to the same genus with these species. The use of the word «because» in this place is thus not quite fair, and the same holds good in other instances, thus for example when it is said on the same page as the above: «I have nothing to say regarding Dr. Mortensen’s sneers at descriptions of pedicellariz, because they do not fit with his classification». My criticism of the description of the pedicellarie of Phormosoma tenue (as well as of other species) given by Professor Agassiz is certainly sufficiently justified by the character of that description, as will be agreed, I imagine, by anybody who will take the trouble to read my remarks on that subject (Part I. p. 57). That Professor Agassiz could not in 1881 recognize the genera proposed by me in 1903 is self-evident. But, nevertheless, I think the remark to which Agassiz refers here quite justified (Part I. p.55). After quoting from the «Challenger»-Echini p. 87 as follows: «In the only species. of the group of which the Challenger collected a complete series (Phormosoma tenue) there was little difficulty in recognizing the young as belonging to the adult» I continue: «We could scarcely wish to find a more pregnant proof of the difficulty or impossibility of determining Echinids without taking the pedicellariz into consideration... With regard to the excellent long series of «Phormosoma» tenue, there are among the specimens referred to this species by Agassiz at all events two different genera, but no genuine Phormosoma/» Professor Agassiz has now established a new species of the genus Kamptosoma, K. indistinctum A. Ag. on a specimen from the «Challenger» St. 272, referred to «Phor- mosoma» tenue (p. 110). I venture to imagine that a more careful examination might have made it possible to recognize this specimen as belonging to a separate genus already even in 1881; of course, it would at that time have been impossible to know the name to be proposed by me later on, but the genus really did exist already at that time. It is also worth noticing that this genus is sufficiently characterized by its peculiar ambulacral structure alone, without regarding the pedicellariz and spines. Professor Agassiz does not deny himself the pleasure of correcting me when mentioning «Phormosoma» asterias as «the last of the Echinothurids described from the «Challenger>» (p. 86); Iam sorry to have to call his attention to the fact that, since I had already treated all the other species, 22 ECHINOIDEA. II. including the last mentioned species Phormosoma rigidum, the Ph. asterias was necessarily the last of them — I did not say the «last named». That the characters on which the genus Kamptosoma was founded appear to Professor Agassiz «most trivial», is, of course, a matter of slight importance, since he accepts the genus. In my opinion the structure of the ambulacra in this genus (which character is mentioned in the diagnosis besides the characters of spines and pedicellariz) is a highly interesting feature, and even Professor Agassiz himself later on in the description of Kamptosoma indistinctum does not evidently think this feature so very trivial. — As regards the species zzdistinctum, it is to be regretted that Professor Agassiz does not say a word about the characters by which it is disting- uished from the species asterias. On p.177 (Part I) I stated that after a renewed examination of the specimens from St. 272 I thought it unjustifiable to separate them from XK. astertas as a new species; it might not have been quite inappropriate therefore to point out the characters on which the new species was established. Until these specific characters are made known I must regard K. zxdistinctum as synonymous with K. asterias. To enter on a renewed discussion of the genus //ygrosoma and its delimitation from Phormo- soma, on account of Professor Agassiz’ remarks on that subject (p. 85—86), I deem unnecessary, since Professor Déderlein has accepted my view thereon and given most careful and elaborate descriptions of both genera, to which I may simply refer. (Op. cit p. 125, 136.) iO After describing the changes in the apical system due to age in Phormosoma hispidum Professor Agassiz says (p. 95): «It is this extraordinary change in the anal system which I had observed in the abactinal parts of the test, which has prompted Dr. Mortensen to credit me with the most extra- ordinary ignorance of the rudimentary embryological data, many of which I was the first to discover. That this remarkable intercalation exists there is not the least doubt, and it naturally suggests in old specimens a flow of the anal plates into the interambulacrum, similar to the flow of the ambulacral plates of the corona into the buccal plates of the actinal system». — I must answer to this statement that I have not at all credited Professor Agassiz with any ignorance of embryological facts, but only criticised his statements in the «Blake»-Echinoidea (p. 32) on the development of the young Phormosoma placenta, and I certainly think my criticism completely justified (Part I. p.174—175). Professor Agassiz himself now agrees (p.96) that his statement there of the formation of the buccal plates was erroneous, viz. that ‘they are «separated from the coronal plates, and are developed, as I (Agassiz) have shown in the same manner as the imbricating plates of the Cidaride, independently of the coronal plates; new plates forming on the distal surface of the actinostome, which are intercalated between the old plates and the coronal plates». That Professor Agassiz has himself found out, before my criticism had appeared, that this was a mistake, does not make this part of my criticism unjustified. I might have added that the conclusion necessarily derived from the statement quoted, that in the Cidaridz also the buccal plates should originate in this way, is not less erroneous, as Professor Agassiz will certainly also agree. ; Concerning the formation of the interambulacral plates, Professor Agassiz continues with the following statement (loc. cit.): «On the abactinal system, on the contrary, while the plates of the genital ring are well defined and seem to be distinctly separated from the coronal plates, yet new interam- bulacral plates are not added independently, as in the ambulacral system, and as in the interambulacral system of other young Echinoids where the genital ring remains permanently closed. The new inter- a ECHINOIDEA. II. 23 ambulacral plates are found to be pushing out from the plates of the anal system on each side of the genital plates. As the ocular and genital plates of the genital ring become separated, with increasing size, the additional anal plates forming in the intervening spaces are pushed out, and become a part of the abactinal portion of the interambulacral area». To this I remarked (p. 175): «This statement is completely incorrect. The interambulacral plates are formed in Ph. placenta as in other Echinids, not by the anal plates. The «genital ring», at all events, is closed, until the animal has reached a size of 17™™ in diameter, and so far accordingly the interambulacral plates must necessarily be formed in the _ common way, as may also easily be substantiated. In a specimen of a diameter of 30™™ a couple of _ ocular and genital plates are still joining, and here the case is quite the same. That a new mode of formation of the interambulacral plates, otherwise quite unknown among: the Echinids, should then suddenly occur, is very improbable — and, above all, Agassiz has not at all proved it; all that may be seen in the larger specimens, is that the small anal plates directly adjoin the uppermost interam- bulacral plates». — I am quite unable to find in this criticism any accusation of ignordnce of em- bryological facts, and I am unable to see, likewise, that 1 am mistaken in my criticism. So far as I can understand the meaning of the above passage quoted from the «Blake»-Echini, Professor Agassiz maintains here that the anal plates are directly developed into interambulacral plates. That mode of development would be in direct opposition to the generally accepted views on the homology of the Echinoid-skeleton, which hold that the interambulacral plates and the anal plates are of very different morphological value. A transformation of the anal plates into interambulacral plates is thus very improbable for morphological reasons, further also, on account of the younger specimens showing the normal condition, and finally, I must repeat that Professor A gassiz has not shown it to be the case. On examining Mr. Westergren’s admirable figures of the abactinal system of «Phormosoma» hispi- dum on Pl. 39 or of, «Asthenosoma» coriaceum on Pl. 52. fig. 1 of «The Panamic Deep-Sea Echini», it is easily seen that the young interambulacral plates originate at the sides of the ocular plates and are not transformed anal plates. — That the anai plates push their way down into the median part of the inter- ambulacrum, separating the two series of interambulacral plates at their upper end, I have never denied or thought absurd; but I must maintain that these anal plates never become interambulacral plates, which was, so far as I am able to see, the meaning of the statement given in the «Blake»-Echini. Whether that is also the meaning maintained in the «Panamic Deep-Sea Echini». I am unable to gather; the ex- pression «a flow of the anal plates into the interambulacrum similar to the flow of the ambulacral plates of the corona on tothe buccal plates of the actinal system», as well as the expression «the intru- sion or flow of the anal plates into the interambulacral system» (p.117) do not seem to mean a trans- formation of these plates into interambulacral plates. If that be the case, Professor Agassiz seems to me to put a new meaning into his old statement, and thus, his remarks against my criticism have no bearing against me, since I have never thought of saying a word against the latter meaning. I think I have now answered all the criticisms which Professor Agassiz directed against me. There are only a few of his more general remarks on the Echinothurids concerning which I must say a few words on this occasion. Professor Agassiz begins the Chapter on the Zchinothuride with this remark: «We may be justified in assuming that the anal system is in the Echinothuride, as in the Cidaride, covered by five small anal plates» (p.75). Ido not think we are justified in making this assumption. The youngest OF THE ( UNIVERSITY 2) 24 ECHINOIDEA. IL. specimens of any Echinothurid hitherto examined (leaving aside the very doubtful «Asthenosoma» hystrix of 3:1™™ figured in Rev. of Ech., Pl. IIc.) are those of 3™™ in diameter described by me (Part I. p. 174). I have stated there that «the periproct is, even in the smallest specimens, covered by a number of small irregular plates, with no larger between. So a central plate seems never to be found here.» Since in this very young stage the anal plates arethus already present in considerable number and do not show any trace of five original larger plates covering the whole anal area, I do not think we are justified in assuming that these 5 large plates are found in a yet earlier stage. I give here a figure of the anal area of the youngest specimen of Phormosoma (scarcely 3™™) seen by me. (Fig. 1.) A matter of much more importance, however, is the statement (p. 91) that in «Phormosoma» hispidum «the bare interambulacral area adjoining the primordial plate is covered with a few minute, elongate, irregularly arranged plates, which correspond to the interradial buccal plates of Cidaris». The same thing is stated for Kamptosoma indistinctum (p.112): «In this species .... we find a few of the same irregular elongate interambulacral plates which in the Cidaridze are as well and as regularly developed as the ambu- lacral buccal plates». It was hitherto assumed to be one of the most important features distinguishing the Czdaride from all the other regular Echinoids that both the ambulacral and inter- ambulacral plates continue over the peristome; the Echinothuride were distinguished by the ambulacral plates alone continuing in the two Echinothurids by Professor Agassiz were really homologous to the interradial buccal plates of the Czdarid@ this fundamental character would have to be given up. Fortunately, the figures given by Agassiz himself afford the proof that these plates are not homologous with the interradial buccal Fig. 1. Apical system of a young Phormo- soma placenta, 3™™ in diameter. 78/1. plates of the Cidarids; since the primordial interambulacral plate is pinhiabenty these small plates lying in the buccal membrane inside (adorally) the primordial plate cannot possibly have any relation whatever to the interambulacral plates and cannot be said to «correspond to the interradial buccal plates of Cidaris». They correspond to those small, irregular plates found in the peristome of the other regular Echini. In treating the Echinothurids in Part I, I had to leave zwcerte sedis the species «Phormosoma» panamense and hispidum, and Professor Agassiz, not recognizing my limitation of the genus Phor- mosoma, does not take the trouble to state to which group these species belong. But from the very careful description and figures of the test combined with my examination of the pedicellariz of the type specimens in the U. S. National Museum, it can be said with certainty that they belong to the genus Echinosoma. It is true that the character of the primary actinal spines of pamamense is unknown, but all the other characters are decidedly those of Echinosoma, so that I think we may safely conclude that the spines also are tipped with a hoof and not provided with a fleshy sack. A more detailed de- scription of the pedicellariz I cannot give on this occasion; it will suffice to say that they agree rather closely with those of Echinosoma uranus and tenue; in panamense I have not, however, found the over the ‘peristome. If these small plates of the peristome found _ ECHINOIDEA. II. 25 larger form of tridentate pedicellariz. In «Ph.» hispidwm 1 have found a kind of ophicephalous pedi- cellaria; this may suggest that ophicephalous pedicellarize will prove to exist also in the other species of the genus Zchinosoma. Agassiz is then evidently right in making pawamense an ally of «Ph.» tenue, whereas it is certainly less fortunate to make «Ph.» hispidum, «the Pacific representative of the Caribbean and Northern Atlantic Ph. wranus», as by the latter is probably meant not the true Achz- nosoma uranus, which is not known from the Caribbean Sea, but the Aygrosoma Petersi, which has hitherto been wrongly called Phormosoma uranus.— Regarding the new species Phormosoma zealandie A. Ag., established on a specimen from the «Challenger» St. 169, identified as «Asthenosoma gracile ?>», _ it is impossible to state with certainty to which genus it really belongs, since not a word is said about the spines and pedicellariz; to judge from the figure given of an ambulacrum (PI. 51. Fig. 3) it may be supposed to be likewise an Echinosoma, which would be in accordance with the statement (p. 108) that it is allied to «Ph.» hispidum. Professors Bell, de Loriol and Lambert besides Professor Agassiz have also opposed my classificatory results. Professor de Loriol only remarks regarding the genus Pseudechinus es- tablished by me for «Echinus» albocinctus Hutton, that he thinks «que cest aller un peu loin que de créer une coupe nouvelle basée sur ce seul et unique caractére (et encore faudrait-il s’assurer qu il est parfaitement constant), qui ne peut s’observer que sur les exemplaires dont le revétement est entiére- ment conservé»!. As Professor Déderlein has already (op. cit. p. 231— 3) carefully answered these objec- tions, I need only refer to his remarks on the question with which I quite agree. I may however make the more general remark that in the Families Echinide, Toxopneustide and Echinometride, the structure of the test is upon the whole very similar, so much so indeed, that it seems impossible in the test alone to find reliable characters even of the families, as is well seen by the manner in which forms of all three families were put together in the genera Echimus and Strongylocentrotus, before the charac- ters of the pedicellariz and spicules were taken into consideration. It almost looks as if, on reaching the high level of development of these forms, nature could not go any farther on those lines, (the Echinometride, of course, form a remarkable exception), and, instead, went on to develop the pedicel- larize, especially the globiferous, into very characteristic structures. Be that as it may; everybody who has studied a large number of the genera and species of these three families, with regard also to their pedicellariz and spicules, must be struck with the remarkable constancy and characteristic appear- ance of these organs and find it very natural to make them the foundation of the classification, in spite of their being so small that they cannot be seen without careful microscopical examination. — De Loriol’s remarks (op. cit. p. 16) on my limitation of the genus Sterechimus as well as those of Professor Déderlein (loc. cit.), I cannot answer before I have undertaken a renewed study of this whole group, which I intend to do in my Reports of the Swedish and the German South-Polar Ex- peditions. Professor Bell in his Report on the Echinoidea from South-Africa? most decidedly keeps aloof from my classification, without giving, however, very definite objections. To his remark that he does t Notes pour servir a l'étude des Echinodermes. II. Ser. Fasc. II. 1904. p. 20. 2 Marine Investigations in South Africa. Vol. III. 1904. The Echinoderma. Part I. Echinoidea. The Ingolf-Expedition. IV. 2. 4 26 ECHINOIDEA. II. not think «that any single character should be made the basis of a classification or that a distance of even hundreds of miles of sea-bottom is sufficient evidence of specific distinctness» (p. 167), I must refer in answer to what has been said above (p. 10) against Professor Agassiz’ characterizing my classification as being based on a single character, and also to the above remarks on Professor de Loriol’s objections. As for taking «even hundreds of miles of sea-bottom» as sufficient evidence of specific distinctness, I absolutely agree with Professor Bell, and I am sure he will be unable to point out any of the species described by me as being based upon geographical distance alone. But, on the other hand, I think Professor Bell will agree with me that great geographical and bathymetrical distance ought always to make one careful in referring specimens to a species otherwise known only from another region, and only to identify them with such species on finding after a careful study of all available characters that they cannot be distinguished. I, for my part, do recognize some species — of Echini as almost cosmopolitan in their distribution, e.g. Hemiaster expergitus (see also my remarks on Echinocardium cordatum in this Part), though I do not recognize Echinus norvegicus as a cosmo- politan species, as it was made by Professor Agassiz. Professor Bell’s remark that «the present condition» of the family Achinothuride «does not warrant any addition to it that need not be made» (p. 169), does not seem to me quite warranted; at least it seems to me that it is easy enough to refer the species to the genera as diagnosed by’ me whereas it was extremely difficult indeed to distinguish between Phormosoma and Asthenosoma after the old fashion. And when Professor Bell expresses the hope that Professor Agassiz by means of his large collections will be able to give us «a definite idea of the range and character of the variation» of the Echinothuride, 1 must say that, if «the minute differences» are not taken into consideration, I fear the «variations» will not be very reliable. The generic value of characters found in pedicellarize may, of course, be disputed; but we can be quite sure that specimens of the same species do not have pedicellarize of very different structure, so that these minute characters, so easily seen with a very little technical skill, should at all events never be despised. Lambert! remarks: «Sans nier la valeur des caractéres fournis paz les organes caducs et mi- croscopiques de I’Kchinide, j’estime que leur nomenclature doit surtout étre fondée sur un ensemble de caractéres observables, aussi bien chez les fossiles que chez les vivants, car la phylogénie est aussi indispensable que l’embryogénie a l’exacte compréhension des formes actuelles. I] ne faut pas appliquer a des animaux inférieurs, dont les organes sont moins spécialisés,.une méthode qui peut étre excellente pour des étres trés évolués et perfectionnés, mais qui, pour les Echinides, fausse toutes les analogies en placant dans des familles différentes des formes aussi voisines que Loxechinus et Strongylocentrotus, que Parasalenia et Goniopygus». For the rest, he states that he agrees with Agassiz in his views on my classification..— The claim that the classification of Echini has to be founded on characters also observable in fossil forms is, so far as I can see, unscientific. It is quite impossible to say a priori which character will be of primary importance for classification. Only by a careful comparative exam- ination of all the characters presented by the animals in question can it be decided on which of these characters the classification has to be founded. When it is proved that some organ which can- ‘In M. Boule et A. Thevenin: Fossiles de la céte orientale de Madagascar. Annales de Paléontologie. I. 1906. p- 14 (56). ECHINOIDEA. II. P 27 not be found in the fossil forms is of primary importance, we must admit that the fossil forms are in some respect insufficiently preserved for identification. I quite agree with Professor Déderlein in his remarks on this subject (op. cit. p. 69). It is, indeed, unfortunate that a good many forms of a group of such eminent palzeontological and geological importance as the Echinidze should not be in quite a fit condition for reliable identification; but that cannot be helped. It is a fact that the naked tests of several recent species of the three families Echinide, Toxopneustide and Echinometride cannot be re- ferred with certainty to their proper genus, or even to the family — the old genera Echimus and Strongylo- centrotus furnish the most evident proof thereof. But when that is the case with the recent forms, it can - certainly not be much better with the fossil forms of such families. We must be glad that it is really possible in very many cases to get a definite result by the examination of the test alone. To point out the case of the genera Loxechinus and Strongylocentrotus being placed in two different families, as a proof that the use of pedicellariz in classification «fausse toutes les analogies», seems to me as unfortunate as the designation of the pedicellarize as «moins spécialisés». To unite Loxechinus and Strongylocentrotus on account of their both being polyporous (which, I think, is Lambert’s reason for doing so) seems to me to be an overestimation of a character which has beyond doubt been developed separately in different groups (Part I. p.132—33; Déderlein op. cit. p. 203). As for the other case pointed out by Lambert as an unfortunate result of my classification, the placing in different families of Parasalenia and Goniopygus', 1 admit that I am not personally acquainted with the fossil Gonopygus, and it may be quite possible that I have been mistaken in placing it in the family Arbacude,; but since it is stated to have its ambulacra composed after the diadematoid type, I fail to see how it could be so very closely related to Parasalenia, which has its ambulacra composed after the echinoid type. The pretended close relationship between Goniopygus and Parasalenia seems to me more founded on false analogies than their separation in two different families. And in any case this classificatory result was not reached by the study of pedicellarize, Goniopygus being only known as fossil. — Finally, when Lambert marks the pedicellarie as «moins spécialicés», I really wonder how these organs, which exhibit so great a richness of forms, in many cases no less than four or five different kinds being found in the same specimen, and so exquisite an anatomical and histological structure, could be thus characterized. And I do not see the reason why it should be wrong to use: the same classificatory principles for the lower animals which have proved good for the higher and more «perfectionnés» animals. Upon the whole, I do not see that in all the critical remarks against my classification set forth by Professors Agassiz, Bell and Lambert there is any real, principal objection. I have no doubt that those who will take the trouble to make a careful study of the pedicellarize in the different forms, especially the regular Echini of the families Echinide, Toxopneustide and Echinometride, and not be satisfied with literary criticisms alone without a study of the objects themselves, will agree with at least the main results reached by me. The fact that Dr. de Meijere and, above all, Professor Déder- lein after his extensive studies accept my results in the main points makes me confident that my method, which is, indeed, to.take all the characters available for systematic purposes into consideration, and to find out by a comparative study of as many forms as possible the systematic value of the different characters, will ultimately prove the right one. 1 Delage & Hérouard. Traité de Zoologie concréte. III. p. 238, 245. 28 ECHINOIDEA. II. Suborder Clypeastroidea. Fam. Fibulariide. 18. Echinocyamus pusillus (O. F. Miiller). Pl. XII. Figs. 4, 6, 9, 18—20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29—3I. Principal synonyms: Echinocyamus angulosus Leske. Fibularia tarentina Lamarck. Echinocyamus parthenopeus Costa. ~— speciosus Costa. Principal literature: O. F. Miiller: Zoologize Danicee Prodromus. 1776. p. 236. Zoologia Danica. III. 1789. p.18. Tab. XCI. Figs. 5—6. — Leske: Additamenta. 1778. p. 215. — Lamarck: Animaux sans vertébres. 1816. p.17. — Forbes: British Starfishes. 1841. p.175. Monograph Echinoderms Brit. Tertiaries. 1852. p. 10. Pl. I. — L. Agassiz: Monographies @’Echinodermes. II. Des Scutelles. 1841. p. 128, 130. Pl. XXVII. Figs. 1—8, 14—18. — Philippi: Beschr. einiger neuen Echinodermen ete. Arch. f. Naturgesch. 1845. p. 356. — Agassiz & Desor: Catalogue raisonné des Echinod. 1847. p. 82. — Diiben & Koren: Skandinaviens Echinod. 1844. p. 279. — M. Sars: Norges Echinodermer. p. 95. Middelhavets Littoralfauna. p. 116. — Heller: Zoophyten u. Echinod. d. Adriat. Meeres. 1868. p. 66. — Costa: Monografia degli Echinocyami viventi e fossili delle Provincie Napolitane. Atti R. Acad. sci. fis. e matem. Napoli. III. 1867. (No. 14) p.4. PL I. 1—2. — A. Agassiz: Revision of Echini. p. 111, 304. Pl. XLe. 3. — Lovén: Etudes sur les Ech. Pl. XVI. 139. Pl. XLIV; Echinologica. Pl. IX. 102—9. XI. 141, 145. — Cuénot: Etudes morphologiques sur les Rchinodermes. Arch. de Biologie. XI. 1891. Pl. XXIV. Figs. 9, 16. — Théel: Development of Echinocyamus pusillus. 1892. — Koehler: Echi- nides et Ophiures ... de I’Hirondelle. (229)'. 1898. p. 24. — Ludwig: Echinod. d. Mittelmeeres. p. 559 — Bell: Catalogue Brit. Echinoderms. p. 160. Pl. XVI. 8—9. — Hoyle: Revised List Brit. Echinoidea p- 419. — Airaghi:? Echinidi Terziari del Piemonte e della Liguria. Palzontogr. ital. VII. 1gor. p. 178. Pl. XXII. — Grieg: Oversigt over det nordlige Norges Echinodermer. 1902. p. 32. — Déderlein: Archtische Seeigel. Fauna Arctica. 1905. p. 382. Die Echinoiden der deutschen Tiefsee-Expedition. 1906. p. 234. Non: A. Agassiz: Revision of Echini. Pl. XIIL 1—8. «Blake»-Echinoidea. p. 40. «Challenger»- Echinoidea. p. 118. — Bernard: (78)". For other less important literature reference may be made to «Revision of Echini>, Ludwig: Echinod. d. Mittelm., Bell: Catalogue Brit. Ech. and Hoyle: Rey. List Brit. Ech. j Though this species has been so often described I must make some additional remarks on it, which I think will not prove to be superfluous. Agassiz has made the important observation that small pores occur along the horizontal sutures of the ambulacra as in other Clypeastrids3; as, however, his description and figures are not t The number refers to the bibliographical list in Part I. 2 Cited after Zoological Record. 1901. — Not seen by me. 3 Joh. Miller: Bau der Echinodermen. Abhandl. d. Acad. Berlin. 1853. ECHINOIDEA. II. 29 based on the true Ach. pustlius — as is shown below — they do not give a correct representation of this feature in pzszd/us. These pores are not most numerous above the ambitus, as is stated in the diagnosis of the genus Lchinocyamus given in «Revision of Echini» (p. 304); on the contrary, while they occur in a single series along each suture above the ambitus they become quite crowded on the actinal side, covering a considerable part of the plates and increasing in number towards the peristome (Pl. XII. Fig. 27). On the analysis of the test given by Lovén (Etudes. Pl. XLIV) the distribution of these small pores is very carefully shown. I must add only that these pores are also found within the petals, on the inner side of the double pores, though of course less numerous and diminishing in numbers _ towards the apical system, only one pore being found on the inner side of the upper pairs of pores of the petals. (Pl. XII. Fig. 31.) Outside the petals also a few small pores occur on both sides, but only at some few of the outer pairs of pores. — In young specimens these small pores are few in number and rather difficult to see; in quite small specimens no small pores are found within the petals. — The inner edge of the -ambulacral plates adjoining the peristome is abruptly bent inwards and here two considerably larger pores are found (PI. XII. Figs. 26, 27), corresponding to two tube-feet distinctly larger than the numerous small tube-feet which cover most of the actinal side. These larger tube-feet are evidently homologous to the large buccal feet of the Regular Echini; otherwise they differ from the small tube-feet only in size, and, like these, they are not provided with spicules or calcareous ring. De Meijere (op. cit. p.107) remarks that there must be some variation in the relative size of the genital and ocular pores in fwszl/us, referring to the figures given under that name by Agassiz in «Rev. of Echini.» Having examined a large number of specimens of Zech. pusilius I find that the genital pores are always larger than the ocular pores, (Pl. XII. Fig. 31), and that the latter are generally much smaller, though sometimes the difference is not very great. The difference in this respect between the figure 3. Pl. XI. e. and figs. 1 and 6. Pl. XIII in «Rev. of Ech.» is due to the fact that these figures repre- sent two different species, only the former being the true Zch. pusillus. The genital pores appear very early, in specimens of only c. 3™ length; I have even seen specimens of only 2™™ in which the geni- tal openings were already distinct. — As stated by Lovén (Etudes. Pl. XVI 139) there is only one madreporic pore, situated near the anterior end of the apical system. This feature is of some impor- tance, giving a good distinguishing character between Achimocyamus and young specimens of Clypeaster, the number of madreporic pores beginning to increase early in the latter. (In a young Clypeaster sp. from St. Cruz of only 5™" length I find 6 pores in the madreporic plate). The internal supports of the test as well as the depressions seen along the sutures between the actinal ambulacral plates are rather well shown on the figures Pl. I. 12—13 of Forbes (Monogr. Ech. Brit. Tert.), and Pl. XXVII.6—7 of L. Agassiz. Costa also (op. cit. Fig. 2.C. D.) gives (rather coarse) figures of the interior of the test. The figure given in «Rev. of Ech.» (PI. XIII. 7), differs very considerably from those above cited; it is evidently another species. A detailed description of these internal struc- tures need not be given, I may refer to the figures given by Forbes and L. Agassiz and to the one given here (Pl. XII. Fig: 29) for comparison with the £ch. grandiporus described below. It will be remarked that the radiating supports continue as far as to the peristome; on the abactinal side they only continue to the outer end of the petals. These ridges are formed by the edges of the interambulacra. The ambulacra show, as seen from the inside, a fairly deep depression along each transverse suture, the 30 ECHINOIDEA. II. pores being placed in these depressions. The innermost ones are directed almost straight towards the border of the peristome, farther out they become parallel to the ambitus; the same feature is seen in the arrangement of the pores as seen from the outside of the test. (Pl. XII. Fig. 27). Among the tubercles are seen some mostly rounded, sometimes irregular, glassy protuberances about as large as the primary tubercles; they are only elevations from the test, not carrying spines or pedicellariz. They are specially numerous on the actinal side (Pl. XII. Fig. 26), and when seen under the microscope are very conspicuous among the white tubercles on account of their smooth, shining surface. On the abactinal side they are less numerous; such a protuberance is generally situated be- tween the two pores of each pair of the petals, elongated in shape and with a distinct longitudinal furrow in the middle. (Pl. XII. Fig. 22.) The spines are short, making a dense clothing. The primary ones, about o5—o:7™ long, are slightly tapering, densely serrate, except at the base (Pl. XII. Fig. 19); those around the peristome are curved. Generally they are a little thicker in the middle, as seen in the figure cited; sometimes they are distinctly widened in the outer part. The point is generally worn off. As pointed out by Agassiz those on the actinal side are somewhat longer than the abactinal ones. The miliary spines (Pl. XII. Fig. 9, 18) are only about half the size of the primary ones, a little widened in the point, which forms a sort of crown, the BIG: TD ) 87.34 eae I BOS EL ng OE a | ) 39 .— — 39 (62°00' — 22°38 — 865 — 2°9 ) 7 — — 40 (62°00 — 21°36 — 845 — 303 ) m— — 76 (60°50. — 26°50° — 806 — 4°1 wh Sag ot i OR Se. a eng Eee ie Be Nai ioe The species was hitherto recorded only from the dredgings of the «Challenger», «Blake» and the Cape investigations (Bell. Op. cit.). Regarding the specimens from the «Challenger» Duncan (loc. cit.) has thrown doubt on their being all really U. marescanus. «It must be admitted that the shape and details of U. Naresi .... given in the «Challenger» Report, Pl. XXIX, XXX, XXX a. are not those of one species. Some forms have and others have not a subanal fasciole; and these last are, moreover, (as Lovén has pointed out), without the peculiar arrangement of the pores of the postero-lateral am- bulacra in the stbanal region, which is seen invariably with a true subanal fasciole. It may be that there are two groups of forms, one without and the other with a subanal fasciole, and yet closely allied, as in the instance of A@craster and Epiaster; or the fasciole may be so small in the area which it surrounds, that it does not interfere with the ambulacra. The final solution of these questions must be left to the distinguished author of the Report on the «Challenger»-Echini». — Also Lambert (Echinocorys. p. 29. Note) is of opinion that the specimens with a distinct fasciole are specifically distinct from those without a fasciole. — Lovén (On Pourtalesia. p.g1) points out that the ambulacral plates I.a.4 and V.b.4 are «slightly expanded interiorly, so as to fill up the feeble re-entering angle offered by the corresponding plates of the posterior interradium, a structure commonly met with also in Holaster and other Meridosterni, and in the Prymnadetes, that is, in forms devoid of a subanal fasciola, and in no wise to be compared with the well known wedge-shaped, extended plates 6+ x, present in all Prymnodesmic Spatangide. Its deficiency in Urechinus is a sure sign of the absence of a subanal fasciola, of which not one of the several specimens carefully examined showed the least trace. There is, close under the periproct, a dense accumulation of ordinary miliary tubercles, not un- like that seen in the same position in some Brissi; it has no relation to the fasciola». — Contempora- neously Agassiz in the «Blake»-Echini p. 52 states that the structure of the subanal fasciole in Ur- echinus «assumes all the stages of development intermediate between a well defined subanal plastron . and a stage in which the fasciole is indicated merely by irregular accumulations of miliary tu- bercles. So that the genus Urechinus is the representative of the oldest Spatangoids .... in which the subanal fasciole (the only one existing) is still in process of formation». Though Duncan thus reserves the final solution of these questions for Professor Agassiz, I may be allowed to set forth a few remarks thereon. I must fully join Professor Agassiz in his state- ment about the fasciole; I likewise find all transitional stages between a distinct fasciole and no traces at all of a fasciole, even in specimens from the same locality. Moreover, I find that in young t The two specimens from St. 39 and 4o differ somewhat in shape from the other specimens, the test being lower and more regularly rounded. The peristome is somewhat smaller than usual, and the secondary tubercles perhaps a little more prominent and numerous. Otherwise I do not find any difference. Unfortunately they are both almost denuded so that I have been unable to find any globiferous pedicellarize on them. There can, however, scarcely be any doubt that they are teally U. naresianus. 6* 44 ECHINOIDEA. II. specimens the fasciole is generally distinct, whereas in larger specimens it gradually becomes less distinct on account of numerous small miliary spines, like those of the fasciole, developing between the primary spines on the adjacent part of the plastron. Lovén is scarcely right in maintaining that the extension of plates I.a.4 and V.b.4 can in no wise be compared with the extension of plates Ia 6+-x and V.b.6.-+x. in Prymnodesmic Spatangide. It is a fact of importance for this question that in Brissopsts (Toxobrissus) pacifica and the species elongata described below the first extended plate is not the 6th but the 7th — a case unknown to Lovén!'; had he known this, he would probably not have laid so much stress on the numero 6. I think it not unreasonable to conclude that, when the subanal fasciole of the Prymnodesmic Spatangidze includes sometimes the plates I.a.7-+ x and V.b.7 +x instead of 6+ x (and nobody will doubt the homology of the fasciole and extension of plates in this case), it may also be possible to regard a fasciole including only the extension of plates I. a. 4 and V.b.4 as homologous with that of the Prymnodesmic Spatangidee? — and that likewise will hold good for the extension of this plate, in case the fasciole is wanting, whether it has disappeared with age or was never formed. That only one plate extends so as to reach within the fasciole cannot be against the homology. In the young Zchinocardium cordatum likewise only one plate extends within the fasciole, viz. the 6th, as is described below. The fact that only one plate extends within the fasciole in U. narestanus thus evidently marks the fasciole of this species as being very primitive and of an embryonal character. — Otherwise, if it be right what Lambert (Etudes sur le plastron des Spatangides) and de Meijere («Siboga»-Ech. p. 153) maintain that the Amphisterni have not devel- oped from the Meridosterni, (and I, for my part, am fully convinced that they are right herein), the — fasciole evidently will have developed independently in each group, and it is thus not surprising to find some differences in its relations in the two groups. Be that as it will, it is certain that the forms without a subanal fasciole agree exactly with those provided with a fasciole in the structure of the ambulacra of the bivium; there cannot be distinguished two groups, one without, the other with a subanal fasciole, as was suggested by Duncan. Nevertheless Duncan was certainly right in suggesting that Agassiz has confounded two species under his Uvrechinus naresianus in the «Challenger>-Report. On an examination of the speci- mens of Urech. naresianus in the British Museum I find that those from St. 158 are not really that species; their globiferous pedicellarie differ so considerably from those of waresianus, that they can certainly not belong to this species; they agree exactly with those of Cystech. Wywillit (comp. below p. 49). Probably these specimens will prove to belong to this latter species; since, however, Cyst. Lovent and Urech. giganteus also have similar globiferous pedicellarie, I shall not try to decide to which species these specimens really belong, but be satisfied with having shown that they are not maresianus. As pointed out by Lovén it is the 4th ambulacral plate in the series I.a and V.b which ex- pands internally to meet the episternal angle, and this is a very constant feature. Among the nume- rous ‘specimens I have examined, I have found only two exceptions: in one case the plate I.a.1 is abnormally divided into two plates with one tentacle each, the plate with the episternal prolongation * Also in Micraster coranguinum there is some irregularity in this respect, it being the V.b.5 which reaches the fasciole according to the analysis of the test given in Lovén’s: Etudes. Pl. XXXIII. 2 In Urechinus giganteus it is the 6th plate which is extended (Panamic Deep-Sea Echini. p. 154. Fig. 221); no fasciole, however, has been observed in this species. ee eee eye ECHINOIDEA. II. 45 thus being number 5; in another case it is the plate V.b.5 which is expanded, but the 4th plate just touches the episternal plate s5.a.3. — Now on the Figure 2, Pl. XXX.a of the «Challenger»-Echinoidea it is seen to be the 5th or 6th plate which thus expands; neither is the fig.g on this plate in accord- ance with the rule. This would seem to prove that the specimens represented in these figures cannot be waresianus (Agassiz also doubts himself, whether the specimen represented in Figs. 1—6 is cor- rectly referred to U. naresianus («Chall.»-Ech. p.147) and since in U. giganteus it is the 6th ambula- cral plate which expands, the suggestion lies at hand that they belong perhaps to this species. On a careful examination of the specimen represented in Figs. 1—6, however, I find the plastron of the ‘same structure as in zaresianus, the 4th ambulacral plate being expanded. The difference in the struc- ture of the plastron from the normal condition shown in Pl. XXX.a Fig. 2 is due to incorrect drawing. (It is beyond doubt that it is really the specimen, figured in the quoted figures, which I have examined; it quite agrees otherwise with the figures, and also the size agrees — it is ca. 28™™ in diameter, and the figures represerit it twice magnified; it is from St. 146.) That this specimen is only an abnormal U. naresianus, as stated by Agassiz (op.cit. p.148), I think quite certain. — As for the figure 9. Pl. XXX. a. it is so-indistinct in the delimitation of the plates that it is certainly allowable to suggest that it is also incorrectly drawn. The specimens from St. 302, which I have likewise examined in the British Museum, differ somewhat from the Atlantic specimens of warestanus in regard to the pedicellariz. The ophicephalous pedicellarize (Pl. IX. Fig. 4) have shorter and broader valves, and likewise the coarse form of tridentate pedicellarize (Pl. IX. Fig. 21) is somewhat different, being more slender than in the Atlantic specimens. On the other hand, the globiferous pedicellariz are like those of ~areszanus, and likewise the structure of the plastron is the same. Perhaps on a careful comparison with the Atlantic specimens this form will prove to be a distinct species; the differences in the pedicellariz pointed out here are, however, certainly too small for founding a new species upon them alone. The geographical and bathymetrical distribution of U. mareszanus has thus to be somewhat restricted; it is stated in the «Challenger»-Report (p. 218) to occur, from «Marion Island to Kerguelen to Australia; Juan Fernandez to Straits of Magellan; Caribbean Islands», at a depth of 1200—1800 fathoms (on p. 255 it is stated to occur at 422 fathoms at the Caribbean Islands). In reality the species is as yet known with full certainty only from the Atlantic and off South Africa (Marion Island), from depths of 422—1715 fathoms. A few remarks may be given here on Uvrechinus giganteus Ag., which I had occasion to exa- mine in the U. S. National Museum, only some fragments, to be sure, but determined by Professor Agassiz himself. («Albatross» St. 3431.) The structure of the test has been most carefully worked out by Agassiz (Panamic Deep-Sea Echini. p. 152), but no mention is made there of the pedicellariz. They prove to be very characteristic. The globiferous pedicellarize (Pl. IX. Figs. 2,6) differ considerably from those of zarestanus; the blade is an elongate, rather thick tube, which has a large, oval opening on the inside at the point, with 1—3 slender teeth on each side at the outer end; the basal part is comparatively small. The valves are invested with a thick skin, not especially thickened over the point, as is the case in warestanus. (Probably there will be some kind of glands within the large tube). The stalk as in maresianus. The ophicephalous pedicellarie are somewhat more elongate, the 46 ECHINOIDEA. II. basal part less developed and the blade more rounded than in saresianus; also the arrangement of the teeth along the edge is somewhat different. (Pl. IX. Fig. 11.) The tridentate pedicellarize (Pl. 1X. Figs. 25, 27), both larger and smaller forms, are more open than in zaresianus,; (I have seen nothing corre- sponding to the coarse form of tridentate pedicellarize); also the triphyllous pedicellariz (Pl. IX. Fig. 12) differ a little from those of the former species, being a little broader. — The miliary spines are like those of zaresianus; the primary spines are smooth in the lower part as in that species; if the outer part is also as in marestanus, I cannot say, having seen only broken spines. The genus Cystechinus is evidently very nearly related to Urechinus; in fact, 1 am unable to see how to distinguish these two genera, as hitherto understood. The «diagnoses» of the two genera in the «Challenger»-Report (p. 146, 148) do not precisely indicate the differences; the only distinguishing character which may be gathered from these descriptions of the genera is «the rudimentary auricles, the raised edge of the actinal opening» mentioned for Cystechinus. This feature, highly interesting indeed and important from a morphological point of view, as pointed out by Agassiz, is, however, found fully as distinctly developed in Urechinus naresianus (Fig. 3). This character cannot thus be used for dis- — tinguishing the two genera. I am likewise unable to find in the elaborate diagnoses of the genera given by Duncan (Revision p.212—13) and by Gregory' any distinguishing feature of reasonable importance. In all the more important features they agree: structure of ambulacra and interambulacra, sternum, actinal and apical system, tube-feet, spines and general shape of the test. The only characters I can find, which might be taken into consideration for distinguishing them as different genera are the following: a subanal fasciole is generally found in young specimens of U. marestanus, whereas it is not found in Cystechinus; but in larger specimens of U. maresianus the fasciole has generally dis- appeared, even so fully that Lovén could find in the structure of the test a sure sign of the total absence of the fasciole, and in U. giganteus it is not found either. On the other hand it seems to be found in Cystech. clypeatus, since according to Agassiz («Challenger»-Ech. p. 149) «the edge of the test adjoining the anal system is thickly covered by miliaries forming a broad band, with an indistinct outer edge (almost a fasciole) surrounding it». — The position of the periproct is below the ambitus in Cystechinus (unknown in C. clypeatus); in. U. naresianus it is generally not quite below the ambitus, but the difference is, indeed, very slight, and in U. giganteus it seems to be quite as in Cystechinus. Finally I may notice the difference in the structure of the pedicellariz, especially the globiferous — but if the genera were to be founded upon the structure of the globiferous pedicellariz, we would have to make U.xaresianus the type of one genus, to unite U. giganteus, Cystech. Wyvillii and Loveni in another genus, further to make a separate genus of Urech. Drygalskyi? and a fourth genus of C. clypeatus. 1 think Professor Agassiz would be the first to object against founding these genera on the differences in the globiferous pedicellariz alone, and I for my part do not hold that necessary either. But then the conclusion is inevitable that the genera Urechinus and Cystechinus cannot be distinguished as hitherto understood. Cystechinus then becomes a synonym of Urechinus, or in any case the species C. Wyvillt and Loveni must be transferred to Urechinus. Probably the C. clypeatus (or one of the species confounded under that name) will prove to make a separate genus, which will then keep the name Cystechinus. The Cystech. vesica has recently been removed by Agassiz himself I Cystechinus crassus, a new Species from the Radiolarian Marls at Barbados. Quarterly Journ. Geol. Soc. 1889. p. 640. 2 Th. Mortensen: Some new species of Echinoidea. Vidensk. Medd. Naturh. Foren. Kobenhayn. 1905. p. 241. ECHINOIDEA. II. 47 (Panamic Deep-Sea Ech. p. 163) to the genus Pilematechinus established there for Cystech. Rathbuni. — A few remarks on the forms mentioned above may be given here. Cystechinus clypeatus. In the description of this species («Chall.»-Ech. p. 149) Professor Agassiz remarks that in the specimens from the greater depths (ca. 1900 fathoms) «the test is much thinner than in the fragments which are found near the 1000 fathom line», This may perhaps be true for other species (Agassiz refers to Pourtalesia, Cystechinus and Urechinus), though I do not see any such difference among the specimens of U. xaresianus from the «Ingolf»; but as for C. clypeatus the - difference in the thickness of the test is in any case not alone due to the different depth at which the specimens lived, but also to their being different species, as I can state after having examined the fragments preserved in the British Museum; the pedicellariz differ so considerably that it seems quite impossible that they can belong to the same species. Also the structure of their apical sys- tems will probably be found to differ considerably. In the description it is said: «The abactinal system closely résembles that of Cystechinus Wyvillit; the genital plates are, however, proportionally larger, the left anterior and the right posterior far exceeding the others in size, and extending entirely across the abactinal area, the whole ceutral part of which is formed by the junction of the genital plates». But the figure, Pl. XXXYV. b. 10, is, as will be seen, not in accordance with that description; the left anterior and right posterior genital plates do not exceed the others in size or extend entirely across the abactinal area, and the whole central part is not formed by the junction of the genital plates, the large ocular plates of the anterior paired ambulacra separating widely the anterior and posterior genital plates. — Among the fragments of Cystechinus clypeatus preserved in the British Museum the apical system is found in those from St. 334, which Med! abiedl ageten Gt belong to the thin-plated form. This apical system does not agree, however, “’stechinus clypeatus (St. either with the description or the figure (Pl. XX XV. b. 10) as will be seen from pat the sketch given here (Fig. 5). (It may be remarked that this figure was made free hand, without a camera, so that the form of the plates may not be quite correct, but in the main features the figure is correct.) In the fragments from St. 133, which evidently belong to the same species as those from St. 334 (both these stations are near Tristan d’Acunha), only the two posterior apical plates, together with some of the plates behind them, are preserved; this part agrees with the figure in the «Chal- lenger»-Echini, which thus seems to have been made after this specimen. Whether the whole figure is correctly drawn can no longer be seen. — Among the fragments from St. 205 (off Luzon, in the China Sea)?, the thick-plated form, no trace of the apical system is found. On the fragments of the thick-plated form (St. 205) I have found three kinds of pedicellariz, viz. tridentate and two kinds of ophicephalous pedicellariz. Unfortunately, no globiferous pedicellarize were found; they will probably also be very characteristic, as is the case with the ophicephalous. The tridentate pedicellarize (Pl. IX. Figs. 14, 28) have a simple, leaf-shaped blade, somewhat narrowed in the lower part. The edge is thick, only faintly serrate, often with a larger tooth at the point; in the larger ones there is, generally, a wingshaped lateral widening below the edge in the lower part of the blade. 1 Alone this very wide distance between the stations might beforehand raise some doubt of these forms being the same species. 48 ECHINOIDEA. II. The basal part is rather large. In the larger ones the valves join along about the outer half, in smaller ones they join a longer way down; in the largest specimens seen the head is o6™™ long. — The ophicephalous pedicellariz are very peculiar. One form has an almost globular head; the valves (Pl IX. Fig. 22) are short and broad, reminding one, indeed, very much of the ophicephalous pedicellariz of the Echinina; the ares are, however, mot distinctly developed, and the stalk is not cup-shaped. In these features they resemble the short broad form of tridentate pedicellariz in Urechinus naresianus, and perhaps they ought really to be regarded as tridentate pedicellariz. The other form (Pl. XI. Figs. 7, 10) has very elongate, narrow valves, with a terminal widening (the blade); the long narrow part represents the apophysis, whereas the basal part is not distinctly developed. The outer edge of the blade forms a series of large teeth, continuing a little way down the sides, rapidly diminishing in size. There is a simple oval deepening in the widened outer part. One of the valves is considerably longer than the two others, and this one alone has an arc developed below the articular surface. The stalk is cup-shaped above, otherwise compact. The length of the head of these pedicellariz is ca. 1™™, and they are, indeed, very conspicuous objects, and by no means rare, but they seem to occur only on the abactinal side, whereas the short, globular form seems to occur only on the actinal side. — Regarding the structure of the test of this form, I can only say that the plates are very large and the pores simple. — The fossil Cystechinus crassus described by Gregory (Op.cit) must probably be nearest related to this thick-plated species. Since neither the apical or the actinal system of this fossil form is known, it was perhaps somewhat hazardous to associate it with this genus, as maintained by Agassiz; but when Professor Agassiz says that «the great thickness of the plates .... would seem to preclude the association of this species with Cystechinus» this objection seems a little curious, since Professor Agassiz himself associates the equally thick-plated form from St. 205 with Cystechinus — and even includes it in the same species with the exceedingly thin-plated form from off Tristan d’Acunha. In the fragments of Cystechinus clypeatus from St. 133 and 334, the thin-plated form, I have found four kinds of pedicellarize, viz. globiferous, tridentate, ophicephalous and triphyllous. The globi- ferous pedicellarize (Pl. IX. Fig. 1) are very peculiar; the blade is an almost closed tube, with a narrow slit along the inner side, and ends in a single hook. I have found only one specimen of this kind of pedicellaria in the dried fragments from St. 133; there is no trace of a thick investing skin, as might be expected in a globiferous pedicellaria; I think, however, that it is really a globiferous pedicellaria (the only other kind to which it might possibly be referred is the rostrate)". The tridentate pedi- cellarie are of two kinds; one has simple, leaf-shaped valves (PI. IX. Fig. 20), narrowed only for a short space below, in the smaller ones joining along their whole length; the edge is very finely serrate. The largest ones seen are ca. 0'8™™ (head). The other form (Pl. IX. Fig. 23) is short, coarse; it was found especially developed in some fragments from St. 133. This form recalls the short thick form of tridentate pedicellariz of Uvrech. naresianus, and as all intermediate stages occur between the short, robust form and the long and slender form of tridentate pedicellariz, it seems to give the. proof that this form in Urech. naresianus must also be regarded as a tridentate pedicellaria. — The «small large- headed» pedicellaria of Cystech. clypeatus, figured in the «Challenger»-Echinoidea, Pl. XLII. Figs. 15—16 1 By the name . The most needed information, viz. that of the development of the test from quite ECHINOIDEA. II. 59 young stages, I cannot give, since, unfortunately, no quite small specimens are found among the pres- ent material. On the other hand, I do not doubt, as does Lovén (Op. cit. p. 22), that the young ones will be found some day. Since we have found quite young specimens of Hemuaster expergitus (see below), a species much more rarely met with than Pouwrtalesia Jeffreysi, it seems not improbable that we shall some day also have the good fortune to meet with the young Pourtalesza. The general form of the test is well described by Lovén (Pourtalesia. p. 6); there is, however, some variation, as pointed out by Michailovskij (Echinod. d. «Jermak» p. 163). Some specimens are - rather short and broad and with short anal rostrum, others are rather flattened; also deformities occur not very seldom, with irregular depressions or with the posterior end awry (Pl. V. Fig. 14), the supra- anal prolongation turning to one side, the anal rostrum to the other. Also the anterior end may be unequally developed, the one side projecting in front of the other. — The Figures 19, 21, 23. Pl. V represent a specimen in which the spines are uncommonly well preserved; the two side-views, Pl. V. Figs. 13, 18 show how different the outline in profil may be. (See also Michailovskij. Loe. cit.) — The species reaches a considerable size; the largest specimens at hand are up to 58™™ in length. Wyv. Thomson states (Op. cit. p. 749) that «the test is so remarkably thin that it will scarcely bear its own weight». I do not find the test of this species so very fragile; on the contrary, I find it almost stout for a deep-sea species. It deserves to be noticed that among the «Ingolf» material there are several old tests (St.113 and 117), which have evidently been partly or completely embodied in the bottom deposits (they were full of mud); most of them are quite uninjured. On one of these tests was found a sea-anemone, on another a sponge. — The sutures of the abactinal lateral plates are, in the larger specimens at least, generally somewhat raised, the plates themselves being somewhat con- cave; this may perhaps be a structure tending to strengthen the test. The morphological structure of the test has been most admirably worked out by Lovén. There is, however, one point of interest on which my rich material enables me to make an addition to our knowledge, which is of some importance, viz. the labrum and the adjoining ambulacral plates. Lovén finds that in P. Jeffreys? the labrum is quite rudimentary, only represented by a small plate on the incurved edge, below the actinostome and not seen from without. The ambulacral plates La.1 and V.b.1 are large and join in the median line in their whole length, whereas the plates I.b.1 and V.a.1 are wanting (or, as Lovén thinks, coalesced with the large plates I.a.1 and V.b.1, which are thus really compound; p. 83) —a considerable difference between this species and the other species examined by Lovén: P. laguncula, carinata and ceratopyga, in which the labrum is distinctly seen from without, separating the inner plates of ambulacra I and V; the plates I.b.1 and V.a.1 are also developed in these species. This feature of P._/effreys? is, however, no constant one. To be sure, the labrum is often, per- haps in most cases, not to be seen from without; but there is considerable variation with regard to this plate. In some specimens it is seen as a very narrow plate, quite enclosed between the two large inner ambulacral plates, in others it is well developed, reaching to the border of the invagination; it may even be divided into a larger outer part and a smaller inner part at the edge of the invagination (Pl. VII. Fig. 10). Regarding the inner plates of ambulacra I and V there is likewise great variation. I have seen one specimen in which only the plate a.t was developed in ambulacrum I, otherwise I g* 60 ECHINOIDEA. II. have constantly found both the inner plates of I and V developed; but the plates I.b.1 and V.a.1 are generally very small and easily overlooked. The plates I.a.1 and V.b.1 may be very unequally developed, one of them simulating the labrum, but the presence of the pore at its inner end shows its real nature. Generally only the four larger of these plates bear distinct pores and tube-feet, in the other plates only quite rudimentary pores are present, sometimes the pore has even quite disappeared. Besides the supposed coalescence between the two inner plates of ambulacra I and V, Lovén, points out (Op. cit. p. 36) as another peculiar feature in this species, that the inner plates of ambulacra II and IV are not in accordance with the general rule that the plates I.a, Il.a, III. b, IV.a, V.b are the largest. I have constantly found the inner plates of the paired ambulacra to be in accordance with the rule, only as to ambulacrum IV I have sometimes been unable to see it distinctly. As it seems very unlikely that all the specimens examined by Lovén should happen to be abnormal in this respect, I must venture to suggest that Lovén has overlooked some of these small plates, which may, indeed, be rather difficult to see. (I have found them easiest to discern when examining the denuded test in alcohol; on dried tests, treated with alcohol-glycerine it is almost impossible to trace the limits between the small plates). A very small plate may sometimes be found be- tween the inner plates of the ambulacra I and II on one side and IV and V on the other side (PI. VIII Figs. 5, 8,9, 11). It must doubtless be regarded as the rudimentary inner plate of the interambulacra.1 and 4. Whether this plate was really absent in Lovén’s specimens or pérhaps was overlooked, it follows from its occasional (not very seldom) occurrence that the plates interpreted by Lovén as No.1 of the interambulacra 1 and 4 (On Pourta- lesia. Pl. II.9) are really No.2. In the figure 9 copied from the quoted figure of Lovén, I have shown my interpretation of these plates. (Comp. Figs. 10, 11 of Fig. 9. Actinal plastron of /0¢7t Ahiale). Upon the whole there is so great variation in the development SINE LE After of the plates of this region that it is scarcely possible to find two specimens quite alike in this respect. Such extensive variation in structures of consider- able morphological importance is of no small interest, and it is shown hereby that the mutual relation of the plates in this region cannot be relied upon for specific differences, in any case for this species, and for the other species it will also be necessary to be very cautious in the use of such characters. The figures 4—6, 8—11. Pl. VIII show some of the variations in the structure of this region found in P. Jeffreyst. (These specimens otherwise are all quite typical P. /efreysi; all variations may be found in specimens from the same station). The primary tubercles form distinct longitudinal (from a morphological point of view: trans- verse) series on the sides at the anterior end of the test. These series generally are very prominent ou the plates of the anterior series of the two antero-lateral ambulacra (II and IV), each plate bearing one series in the middle, the tubercles increasing somewhat in size from the anterior towards the posterior edge of the plate. On the plates of the posterior series of these two ambulacra the tubercles are more irregularly arranged, and on the posterior part of the test they are upon the whole quite irregularly arranged, though sometimes there is a tendency towards a serial arrangement. The plates ECHINOIDEA. IL ee forming the anterior edge (posterior series of the antero-lateral interambulacra) are rather closely covered by primary tubercles, not arranged in distinct series. (Comp. Lovén. Pourtalesia. Pl. I. 3). The miliary tubercles are generally very numerous, especially on the anterior end of the test. — One speci- men is interesting in showing in considerable number the empty places of primary tubercles; the places are distinctly seen, but covered with pigmented skin, and it looks as if miliary spines have appeared in some of them. As mentioned above (sub Urechinus naresianus, p.41) Agassiz thinks such cases a proof of the spines having been resorbed —I think it more probable that it is the result - of some damage undergone by the specimen. f The primary spines are of a rather uniform length, the longest of them (the posterior ones of those on the anterior series of plates of the antero-lateral ambulacra, in accordance with the size of the tubercles) scarcely reaching one third of the length of the test. They are slightly curved, generally smooth, ending in a simple point. Those of the sternum are somewhat flattened, widened at the point. The spines on the invaginated portion are short and very robust (Lovén. Pourtalesia. Pl. V. 36); those near the edge are longer and more slender, gracefully curved. The miliary spines are widened at the point and curved, as figured by Wy v. Thomson (Pl. LXX. 8); the clavulz of the fasciole essentially as the miliary spines, the widened point only a little shorter and thicker. Spicules are almost totally wanting; sometimes, however, a very few irregular, branched rods occur at the outer end of the tube-feet. The tip of the tube-feet, on the contrary, is enclosed by a rather thick cap (or broad ring) of calcareous network (PI. VII. Fig. 21); this holds good, however, only for those of the antero-lateral ambulacra, which are, upon the whole, rather well developed. In those of the odd anterior ambulacrum such a calcareous cap is generally not found; sometimes a few irreg- ular spicules occur there, but mostly they are quite destitute of spicules. Of pedicellarize two kinds, viz. ophicephalous and tridentate, were described and figured by Wyv. Thomson, and two kinds, viz. ophicephalous and rostrate («laternenférmige» tridentate) by D6- derlein (Echinoiden d. deutschen Tiefsee-Exped. p. 269). I have found these three forms; globiferous pedicellarize do not seem to occur. The rostrate pedicellarize (Pl. XI. Figs. g—10, 30) are rather conspicuous and numerous; the head up to ca. o'5™", more or less dark pigmented. They are generally threevalved, but two- and fourvalved specimens occur. (For the description of the valves, comp. Déderlein, loc. cit.) The elegantly shaped ophicephalous pedicellariz are likewise well described by Doderlein, whilst Wyv. Thomson has given a pair of rather good figures of them; I give here only figures of isolated valves in front and side view (Pl. XI. Figs. 4,7). — It may be noticed that the narrow part of the valves of these pedicellariz contains a small irregular cavity, which opens into the deepening in the widened outer part. This is, otherwise, especially distinct on the ophicephalons pedicellaria of Pourt. paradoxa figured Pl. XI. Figs. 3,6. I have not found the ophicephalous pedicellariz on all the specimens. — The tridentate pedicellarie, the form figured by Wyv. Thomson Pl. LXX. Fig. 10, are very small, with a short but distinct neck. The valves (Pl. XI. Fig. 8) are simply leafshaped, the edge of the outer part rather coarsely serrate. (That this form must be regarded as a tridentate, not a tri- phyllous pedicellaria becomes evident from what is found in Pourt. hispida (comp. below p. 78); also in Plexechinus hirsutus a quite similar tridentate pedicellaria occurs together with typical triphyllous pedicellariz; comp. above p. 56.) 62 ECHINOIDEA. II. Regarding the internal anatomy it may be pointed out that there is a double sipho, the outer one rather widened at its aboral end (Pl. VII. Fig. 14); the blind diverticulum is well developed, lobate (Pl. VIL Fig. 2,4). The course of the stone canal (Pl. VII. Fig.2) as in Urechinus naresianus. The axial organ is seen as a small swelling near the upper end of the stone canal (PI. VIL Figs. 3,12). (The figures of the internal anatomy of Pourtalesie given in the «Challenger»-Echinoidea only show the course of the intestine and the shape of the genital organs; the diverticulum, the siphones, stone-canal and axial organ are not represented). The genital organs show the curious feature of being very dif- ferent in shape in the two sexes. The female genital organs are long thick tubes, quite unbranched, but irregularly folded (Pl. VII. Fig. 11); the male organs are of the usual bush-shape, with an unusually long efferent duct (Pl. VII. Fig. 12). No spicules are found in the walls of the genital organs or in- testine. Genital papille are well developed, sometimes even very long (ca. 8"). The genital openings are not developed in specimens of 18—20™™ length; in a specimen of 22™ they are developed. The smallest specimens in hand (18—20™™) do not differ essentially in the shape of the test from the grown specimens, they are only somewhat more slender. The abactinal keel is distinct, but is less produced over the periproct than in the grown specimens. Considerable numbers of this species were taken by the «Ingolf» at the following stations: St. 103 (66° 23' Lat.N. 8°52’ Long. W. 579 fathoms + 0°6 C. Bottom temp.) 2 specimens. Si ea = hose i A a RA Mig AMIR, Mc Pb. sb on —)74 —(+ ca. 10 dead tésts) — 116 (70°05) — 8° 26' _ 371 — + 0°4 mes — )aapo— AS oe SAS COR ake 500. =e — )10 —(-+ 1 dead test) — 119 (67°53) — 10° 10) —— SOIGr ga +1o — me RS A aT NA {67* gore TEM gO So ph ie A —)15 -— — 126 (67°10 = — 15°52) — 293 — +0°5 ‘= ein ode — 138 (63°26° — 7° 56! — 471 — ° +0% —- —)4 — The species is distributed all over the «cold area» of the Norwegian Sea, from the Feroe Channel to Spitzbergen, Novaja Zemlja (Knipovitsch. Op. cit.) and East Greenland (Kolthoff. Op. cit). The bathymetrical distribution is from ca. 125 (D6éderlein. Fauna Arctica) to ca. 1300 fathoms. It is further recorded from the Bay of Biscay (Norman. op.cit.) and from the American side of the Atlantic (Rathbun, Verrill. op.cit.). The specimens upon which these indications are founded, will probably turn out to belong to the Pourtalesta Wandeli, described below, or to P. miranda A. Ag. Among the specimens of Pourtalesia from the warm area of the Atlantic dredged by the «Ingolf» there is no P. Jeffreyst (with regard toa few small specimens from St. 40,67 and 68, comp. below, p. 68), and some specimens which I examined in the U. S. National Museum are likewise certainly not P. Jeffreyst — as far as they are not so badly broken that it is impossible to identify them with any probability (which was exactly the case with the specimens from St. 2084, mentioned in Rathbun’s Catalogue, loc. cit). The specimens more tolerably preserved seemed to me to be all P. Wandel; but in view of the uncertainty prevailing with regard to P. miranda (comp. below p. 65—66) I do not venture after the short examination which I could undertake there, to say with certainty to which species they belong. I only want to state that I have seen no true P. Jeffreys? among them. The same holds good for several specimens, which Professor Verrill kindly let me examine. — Upon the whole it must be emphasized that at the present time P. Jeffreys? is not known with certainty from the warm ECHINOIDEA. II. 63 area of the Atlantic f+ its occurrence in the Bay of Biscay (Norman. op.cit.) must likewise be re- garded as doubtful, the statement evidently being made without a close examination of the speci- mens —), and I doubt that it will be found there. Pourtalesia Jeffreyst is the only deep sea Echi- noid known from the cold area; it is only known from there, and it will probably turn out to inhabit the cold area alone, as has been proved for most of the animal forms of that region. From this consid- eration Grieg (op. cit.) has already doubted the correctness of the identification of the specimens from the American coast recorded by Professor Verrill under the name of Pourtalesia /Jeffreysi, and ' the doubt was quite justified. 22. Pourtalesia Wandeli Mrtsn. Pl. V. Figs. 1—7, 11—12. Pl. VIII. Figs. 1—3, 7, Pl. XI. Figs. 1, 13-14, 18—20, 23, 34—37, 40-41. Th. Mortensen: Some new species of Echinoidea. Vid. Medd. Naturh. Foren. Kobenhavn 1905. p. 242. gi The shape of the test is rather elongated, more slender than in P. /ef/reysz. The front end is almost vertical; on the abactinal side the test rises gently towards the middle, where the greatest height is found, and then slopes gradually towards the posterior end. An abactinal keel is hardly indicated in larger specimens, whereas it may be more distinct in smaller ones. The test is not pro- duced over the periproct; in side view the outline of the abactinal side is thus seen to continue to the posterior end of the short anal rostrum scarcely without any sinuation over the periproct, a very conspicuous difference between the species and P. /effreysz, as is seen on comparing the figures 11 and 13, 18, 23 of Pl. V, representing side views of the tests of these two species. — In younger specimens the outline in profil of the posterior end is somewhat different (PI. V. Figs. 5,12) in accordance with the more developed abactinal keel, the periproctal sinuation being considerably more distinct. The sides of the test are almost parallel, the width augmenting only very little towards the posterior half, the greatest width being found a little past the middle; from there it rapidly narrows towards the posterior end. The actinal side is almost flat — a conspicuous difference from P./ef/reys?, as is seen on comparing the figures 11,12 and 13,18. Pl. V. Among smaller specimens of the two species this differ- ence is, however, not so great, P. /effreysd being flatter on the actinal side when younger. The sternum and episternum form a rather distinct actinal keel, which continues along the under side of the anal snout. The actinal invagination is somewhat longer than in P. /efreyst; the number of plates in the odd ambulacrum is, however, the same as in /ef/reyst, 12—13. The form of the peristome as in Jeffreyst. — The test seems to me a little more fragile than in /efreysi. Regarding the structure of the test this species agrees in the main features with P. /efreysz. The labrum is generally not seen from without, may, however, be found as a small plate between the ambulacrals I.a.1 and V.b.1, which are distinctly developed; eight simple pores are found at the posterior edge of the invagination (Pl. VIII. Figs. 1,3); none of the inner ambulacral plates have two pores. If the tube-feet are developed on all the plates I dare not assert, as it is rather difficult to dis- cern them among the small spines in this place, both spines, tube-feet and skin being covered by dark violet pigment; also the pores may be very difficult to discern, as in P. Jeffreyst. A small plate may be found between the ambulacrals I and II on one side and between IV and V on the 64 ECHINOIDEA. IL other side, evidently the inner plate of interambulacra 1 and 4 (Pl. VIII. Fig.1), as it is also found sometimes in P./effreysi. Upon the whole the structure of the actinal side, labrum, sternum, episternum, the two ambulacra of the bivium and the postero-lateral interambulacra agree very nearly with that of P. Jeffreysi. The periproct differs a little in outline from that of /efreysz, being more elliptical, not abruptly widened in the upper part as in that species. The plates surrounding the periproct are 5. a. 6—8 and b.7—9; this holds good also for younger specimens, whereas in smaller specimens of P. /e- Jreyst (till at least a size of 30") there are 4 epiproctal plates on each side (5.a.5—8 and b.6—g) (in larger specimens there are only three epiproctal plates as in P. Wandelt, the lower pair being shut off from the periproct). The apical system (Pl. VIII. Figs. 2,7) as in /effreyst, perhaps a little closer to the anterior border than in that species. I have found a case of the genital plates being distinct (Pl. VIII. Fig. 2) as found exceptionally by Lovén in /efreysz (in that species I have not met with such a case). The tuberculation shows some difference from P. /ef/reyst. The linear arrangement of the pri- mary tubercles is in larger specimens more prominent than in that species. The interambulacral plates at the front sides (posterior series of interambulacra 2 and 3) each bear two prominent parallel or posteriorly a little diverging, series of primary tubercles; on the uppermost and lowermost 2—3 plates of this series the linear arrangement of the tubercles is indistinct. The part of these plates, which is bent over on the front edge, bears only few, irregularly arranged primary tubercles, as is also the case with the other plates on the front. The following two series of plates (ambulacra II and IV, a.b.) bear a series of primary tubercles each. Also the following interambulacral plates show ‘a tendency towards . a serial arrangement of the tubercles. In these series the tubercles always increase in size from before towards the posterior end, the hinder one being the largest. It is only the plates on the sides of the test which have the tubercles thus serially arranged. The rest of the test has like P. /effreysi only irregularly scattered primary tubercles, somewhat less numerous, however, than in that species. The miliary tubercles are upon the whole less numerous than in /efreysz, the test looking more smooth than is generally the case in that species. The sutures are not elevated as in /ef/reyst. — Though the serial arrangement of the primary tubercles is much more prominent in P. Wandeli than in /Jeffreysi, when larger specimens are compared, it must be conceded that in smaller specimens the serial arrange- ment is almost equally developed in both species. The primary spines of the abactinal side are very long; especially those of the anterior series of the antero-lateral ambulacra and those of the interambulacral plates on the front edge, and — in accordance with the size of the tubercles — the posterior spine of each series is the longest. The longer of these spines reach from the anterior end of the test to the periproct, thus reaching more than two thirds of the length of the test. They are curved and bent backwards, lying rather close to the test; generally they are strongly thorny, especially along the convex side, which gives them a . characteristic lustre. Sometimes they are irregularly curved at the point. (PI. V. Figs. 1, 3,5. Pl. XI. Fig. 36). These long spines give this species a very characteristic appearance, differing highly from P. Jeffreyst in which species the spines are much shorter, smooth, and generally not bent backwards over the test. (Comp. Pl. V. Figs. 1, 3,5 with Pl. V. Figs. 19, 21, 23). — The spines of the actinal plastron (Pl. XI. Fig. 35) are flattened at the point, like those of /efreysi, and likewise those within the invagi- ECHINOIDEA. II. 65 nation (Pl. XI. Figs. 20, 34) as well as the miliary spines (Pl. XI. Figs. 37,41) and the clavule agree with those of /effreysz. _ The tube-feet are small and simple, without spicules, but generally with a polcaeboive cap as in Jeffree The spheeridiz placed singly, not presenting peculiar features. The pedicellariz are repre- sented by the same three kinds as in /effreyst. The rostrate pedicellarize (Pl. XI. Figs. 1, 19, 23) are characteristic, broadly rounded and rather densely serrate at the point, differing distinctly from those of Jeffreyst. The ophicephalous pedicellariz are much more alike in the two species, only the terminal portion is perhaps upon the whole a little smaller in P. Wandeli (Pl. XI. Figs. 13, 14). The tridentate pedicellariz (Pl. XI. Fig. 40) are alike in both species. The internal anatomy agrees with /efreysz, only the female genital organs are slightly ramose. The genital openings are not yet developed in a specimen of 20™ length, but in a specimen of 21™™ they are found; on the other hand they are not yet fully developed in a specimen of 26™™. It is thus evident that this species is not mature before it has reached a size of a little over 20™™ length. The largest specimens are 53™™. Distinct genital papille are found in the grown specimens. The colour is dark violet; also the spines may be so coloured (always so in life ?). According to a coloured sketch from a living animal (St. 36) the living animal is more claret coloured, or to speak very exactly, intermediate between «vinosus» and «atro-violaceus», with a tint of «atropurpureus» along the abactinal keel. (Saccardo. Chromotoxia. Ed. II. 1894). This species was taken by the «Ingolf» at the following stations: St. 18 (61° 44' Lat. N. 30° 29’ are W. 1135 fathoms 3°0C. Bottom temp.) 1 specimen. — 24 (63°06' — 56°00’ 1199 — a4 aa ae eer ee FN RI eee BARS 9 6 53s Seah RE yp Se Bee BR”. Ge SR > 2 5 MR eam SF ee sre MO: ils -< t 39 (62° 00’ pb 22° 38" es! 865 a 2°9 Bic td ) I bel: — 40 (62°00! — 21°36 . — 845. — 33 = vate eis 2s wot) PO) SAR 9 Eines aR, AR” SAI wre O75 3 Cee a ee Most of the specimens were broken. — Further a pair of broken specimens were taken by the «Thor» St. 164 (62° 10’ Lat. N. 19° 36’ Long.W. 1144 fathoms); they are mentioned as Pourtalesia miranda? in Johs. Schmidt: Fiskeriundersogelser ved Island og Fergerne i Sommeren 1903. p. 241. — The species is thus known to occur in the warm area of the Northern Atlantic from South of Iceland to Davis Strait, from 845—1715 fathoms; probably it will prove to be distributed over a large part of the . warm area of the Atlantic. It seems to be a more exclusively deep-sea species than P. Jeffreysz. I have named this species in honour of the chief commander of the slnguliesmedition, Ad- miral Wandel. P. Wandelt is, evidently, rather nearly related to P. /effreysz, but is easily distinguished from the latter species, mainly by the shape of the test, the long, curved and thorny abactinal spines and the rostrate pedicellariz. Its relation to P. miranda A. Ag. is, for the present, not quite clear, because our knowledge of the latter species is rather unsatisfactory. In the «Panamic Deep-Sea Echini» p. 139 it is stated that the type specimen was only 3°5™™ in length; nevertheless it was mature, the genital openings being already fully developed, as shown in: Fig.9. Pl. XVII of «Rev. of Echini» and t Skrifter udgivne af Kommissionen for Havundersogelser. No. 1. 1904. Kobenhayn. The Ingolf-Expedition. IV. 2. 9 66 ECHINOIDEA. II. also mentioned in the description (p. 345). As P. Wandelt is not mature at a smaller size than ca. 20™™ length, this difference between these two species seems so essential that they could for that reason alone not be regarded as so very closely related. I must, however, be allowed to suggest, that this statement of the size of the type specimen of P. mivandais a mistake. In the description in «Rev. of Echini» as well as in the preliminary description (Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. I. 1869. p. 272) nothing is said about the size of the specimen, but in the explanation of the Pl. XVIII the figure 1 is said to represent the specimen «magnified 35 in diameter». The figure being 70™™ in length, this would give a size of 20™ for the type specimen. (In «Three Cruises of the «Blake» II. p.1or the figures from the «Revision» are copied in half size, and the figures are then said to represent the specimen twice magnified; this would give a size of 18™™ for the type specimen). I think there can be little doubt of the correctness of my suggestion as to the size of the type of P. miranda (which has, unfortunately, been lost), and thus this difference between P. miranda and Wandeli is reduced to nothing. (It would also be quite surprising that a specimen of so small a size as 35™™ should be mature). The structure of the test of P mzranda is not worked out in the «Revision of Echini», but in «Panamic Deep-Sea Echini» p. 140 careful figures are given thereof, from a specimen of 18™™ length, collected by the «Blake». This specimen, it must be conceded, agrees very closely with PR Wandeli, the only differences worth mentioning being that the anal snout bends a little upwards and that the labrum is large, which I have never found to be the case in P. Wandel. Remembering, however, the inconstancy of this feature in P. /efreysz, it is not safe to lay much stress on this single feature. I thus think it very likely, indeed, that the specimen figured in the «Panamic*Deep-Sea Echini» under the name of P. miranda is identical with P. Wandeli; but on the other hand I cannot think that it is really P. miranda. A comparison with the original figures in «Revision of Echini» Pl. XVIII shows several important differences. The outline in side view is very different; in the figure in «Rev. of Ech.» the front slopes forwards from the apical system, in the specimen figured in «Pan. Deep-Sea Ech.» it slopes inwards; but the anal region especially is very different, the projection over the peri- proct being much larger and the anal snout turning much more upwards than in the specimen from the «Blake»; the snout is also much broader in the type specimen. The differences pointed out here hold good also when comparing with P. Wandeli; further I may notice a very conspicuous dif- ference in the spines. According to the description the primary spines are long, curved, slightly fan- shaped at the extremity, as also appears in the figures; no serial arrangement of the spines is indi- cated on the figures or mentioned in the text. It seems hardly possible that the serial arrangement, so evident in P. Wandeli and the specimen from the «Blake», could have escaped completely the notice of the author of «Revision of Echini», the figures looking, indeed, much too good and carefully drawn for suggesting such an omission.- Also the length of the spines is very different from what is — the case in ?. Wandeli, — Further the large tentacles in the odd ambulacrum and the coloration are conspicuous differences from P. Wandel. In my opinion it can scarcely be doubted that the specimen described and figured in «Panamic Deep-Sea Echini» as P. miranda is not that species but P. Wandeli, (or a nearly related, undescribed species — comp. below), whereas P. miranda, which has still to be rediscovered, belongs to a quite different type of Pourtalesiz, characterized (as far as hitherto known) by the broad anal snout, the large front tentacles and the comparatively short, not serially arranged ECHINOIDEA. IL. 67 spines. In these characters P. miranda agrees with P. laguncula, and Agassiz («Challenger»-Echini p. 137) is certainly right in stating that «this species is closely allied to P. miranda». Also the P. Tanneri is regarded by Agassiz as closely related to P. aguncula; it is, however, not clear from his otherwise (regarding the structure of the test) very elaborate description and figures of this species, whether it agrees with /aguncula (and miranda) in the shape of the spines and the development of the front ten- tacles. Of the spines it is only said: «the primary radioles on the flanks of the test are also longer, while in P. daguncula and P. miranda they are somewhat spathiform» (Pan. Deep-Sea Ech. p. 132). The - front tube-feet are not mentioned at all. Having received a specimen of P. Zanneri from the U. S. National Museum I can state that the spines are not widened towards the point, whereas the frontal tube-feet are really rather large and conspicuous. The pedicellarize do not afford any proof of a close relationship between P. Zanneri and laguncula. In the former species I have found only rostrate pedicellarize with rather slender valves (Pl. XI. Fig. 11) and small tridentate pedicellarie of the same form as in 2. Jeffreyst. In P. laguncula (examined in the British Museum) I have found (in a specimen from St. 232) globiferous pedicellarie with the valves ending in two or three long teeth, resembling closely those of P. carinata (comp. Pl. XI. Figs. 16, 22), ophicephalous pedicellariz with rather elongated, slender valves (Pl. XI. Fig. 12) — (differing considerably from those figured in the «Chall.»-Ech. Pl. XLII. 18 —r1g under the name of «Clypeastroid-like» pedicellarize, so much, indeed, that they can scarcely be- long to the same species) — and two forms of tridentate pedicellarize, viz. the usual small form, which, however, here occurs also with the apophysis continuing into the outer edges of the blade, and a larger form with long and slender valves with the blade almost flat (Pl. XI. Fig. 33), the outer edge very finely serrate. (This form differs so much from the pedicellariz of the other species that it may perhaps be suggested not to belong really to this species). Of rostrate pedicellarie I have found only one small specimen, which does not differ essentially from those of P. Zanneri. Small spicules, in the shape of fenestrated plates are found in the large frontal tube-feet. The form figured in the «Challenger»-Echinoidea Pl. XXXI. 7—11 and mentioned (p. 138) as younger specimens of P. daguncula showing «considerable variation in the outline» can hardly be the same ‘species as that figured in the same Plate, Figs.1—6, which must be taken as the type of the species. The latter specimen was 22™", that represented in the figure 7—11 was 12™™ in length. It seems hardly conceivable how so great a difference in the shape of the test could be due merely to changes during growth, and a growth only from 12 to 22™™ in length. This is made even more un- likely when we learn («Chall.»-Ech. p. 138) that «some of the specimens with narrow anal snout char- acteristic of the smaller specimens measuring from 12—16™™ were nearly 19™™ in length». The con- clusion seems quite inevitable that this form with the narrow anal snout is a distinct species, which will perhaps prove identical with P. Zannert. The material preserved in the British Museum does not give the solution of the question, since no specimen is found which can with certainty be recognized as belonging to the narrow type («Chall.»-Ech. Pl. XXXI.7—11). Specimens of the broad type, the real P. laguncula are preserved from St. 232 and St. 191 (the latter are badly crushed, but can, however, be recognized as belonging to this form); from St. 169 small fragments only are preserved, which cannot be recognized as belonging to either of the forms, and the same is the case with the anterior ends * 9 A BRARWS {3 OF THE x | UNIVERSITY OF : CALIFORNIE 68 ECHINOIDEA. II. of two specimens from St. 168. A specimen from St. 244 is certainly not P. daguncula; whether it is the narrow form cannot be decided with certainty, since it is very crushed, but it does not seem to be that form — in that case the figures Pl. XXXI.7—9 would indeed be very bad. Probably it is a third species, related to P. phiale. The spines are widened at the point as in the latter species. Also the true P. daguncula is represented as having the spines distinctly widened at the point (Pl. XXXI. Figs. 1—5); in the description they are said (p.137) to be «tapering very slightly or clubshaped». They are, in fact, not at all widened or clubshaped, but several of the spines are invested towards the point with a dark brown matter, the nature of which I could not decide. But in any case it is a foreign matter, not part of the spine itself. The figures cited therefore give a wrong impression of this species as regards the form of the spines. Perhaps one more species, allied to P. /effreyst and Wandelt, will be found to occur in the northern Atlantic (warm area). Among the specimens of Pourtalesia Wandelt from the «Ingolf» St. 40 and further from St.67 and 68 there are some small specimens (18—25™™) of a Pourtalesia, which differ from P. Wandelt in having shorter and smooth (or very little serrate) spines and the abactinal keel more developed and produced over the periproct; the anal snout bends a little upwards. In fact these specimens are rather like /. /effreysz; from this species they differ, however, in having only three epiproctal plates (5.a.6—8 and b.7—9), whereas in /effreyst of a corresponding size there are four epiproctal plates on each side (a. 5—8, b.6—g); also the anal snout «is flatter in /efreyse. The general shape of the test is as in P. Wandeli, though a little narrower at the anterior end and compa- . ratively a little wider in the middle. The serial arrangement of the tubercles not distinct in the pos- terior series of plates of the antero-lateral ambulacra. Upon the whole this form is quite intermediate between P. Wandeli and /effreysi, uniting several of the prominent characters of these two species. It further agrees rather closely with the form figured as P. miranda in «Panamic Deep-Sea Ech.», excepting the labrum, which is not seen from without in these specimens. — Whether this be a distinct species or only a variety of P. Wandeli (or perhaps a warm area variety of P./effreysz) I do not venture to decide from the present scanty and not too well preserved material; I must be content with calling attention to this form and leave it to those who will be so fortunate to get sufficient material to decide the question. 23. Echinosigra' (Pourtalesia) phiale? Wyv. Thomson. Pl. VI. Figs. 1—2, 7. Pl. VII, Figs. 1, 7. Wyville Thomson: Depths of the Sea. p.go. (394). Ann. Nat. Hist. 4 Ser. X. p. 305. «Porcu- pine»-Echinoidea. p. 749. Pl. LXX. Fig. 11. — A. Agassiz: «Challenger»-Echinoidea. p. 138. Pl. XXII I—5. XXII. a.1—2. — D’Arcy Thompson: (392). Proc. R.Soc. Edinburgh. XXII. 1899. p. 431. — St. W. Kemp: The Marine Fauna of the West Coast of Ireland. III. Echinoderms. Ann. Rep. Fish. Ireland. 1902—03. Pl. II. App. VI. (1905). p. 206. t With regard to this name, see below p. 82. 2 In the Report on the Echinoidea of the «Porcupine» Wyv. Thomson writes « continues posteriorly into a long and slender neck, highly compressed and so very fragile that it is quite remarkable that it is not broken in two of the speci- mens. One cannot help thinking that it must be rather unpractical and dangerous to have such a fragile neck and that it would be more safe to have a flexible test, like Pilematechinus vesica e. g. — The posterior part of the test is much higher and broader than the «neck», forming the «body», in which is contained the intestine, the neck having room only for the cesophagus. Posteriorly the body narrows into a rather long and narrow anal snout simulating a tail; it bends a little upwards, and is as usual surrounded by a rather broad fasciole. The abactinal keel is not produced over the anal area, which is oval, not much sunken. — The test is rather transparent, the largest specimen brownish, the smaller ones lighter, almost colourless. As is seen on comparing figures 3—5 and 6, 18, 20 of Pl. VI the shape of the test becomes somewhat transformed with age, mainly by the «body» growing comparatively higher and, espe- cially, broader (thicker); in the larger specimens the «ventral» side is rather flat (though always with a median keel), the test thus keeping the natural position very easily — a fact probably of no small ECHINOIDEA. II. 73 importance for the animal, since it is hardly conceivable, how the animal could get the right position again, if it were turned over, the short spines being hardly able to set up the thick body with its heavy contents. In the younger specimens the ventral side is not so flat, but the spines are here com- paratively larger and in so far better adapted for keeping the body in the right position. Some measurements are given here of the three best preserved specimens; the two larger ones have only a few small holes in the test; in the third one the neck is broken, but the specimen is otherwise well preserved. The other specimens are represented by separated anterior and posterior ends. — All the measurements are in mm. Total length Width of «head» Width of «neck» Height of «neck» Height of «body» Width of «body» Length of «tail» 37 6 3 5 12°5 12 4 26 47 2°5 38 8 58 35 22 48 ae 3'5 75 : 6 35 The structure of the test (Pl. VI. Figs. 17, 19, 21. Pl. VII. Fig.5) is essentially the same as in P. phiale, the main difference lies in the extreme elongation of the inner plates of the bivium. The labrum is rather broad and very long, 6°5™™ in the specimen of 26™™ length. The inner plates of the ambulacra I and V are both well developed, narrow and very elongate, joining at their outer end the second plate of the corresponding series, the bivial ambulacra thus being uninterrupted. Each of the inner plates carries a single tube-foot', the same is the case in the ambulacra II and IV, the edge of the invagination thus being provided with 8 rather well developed and distinct tube-feet. The plates I. a, Il.a, IV.a V.b thus do not carry two pores, but their relative size is in conformity with the general rule. The inner plate of the interambulacra 1 and 4 is distinct, but, as in Ahzale, separated from the corresponding second plates by the widened ambulacral plates II.a.2—3 and IV. b.2—4. The labrum joins at its outer end the two ambulacral plates I.a.2 and V.b.2. They are also very much prolonged, no less than 7:5™™ in the specimen of 26™™ length, somewhat widened in the outer half. As in phzale they show the curious feature of being split up at the oral and aboral end by a longitudinal line proceeding from both ends a long way into the plates; these two lines, however, do not join in the middle (Pl. VI. Fig. 21), the plates thus being undivided. In this figure the outer part of the oral end of this plate is seen to be prolonged a considerable distance along the labrum to meet the first ambulacral plate; in the largest specimen it is — as far as I am able to discern it — not pro- longed orally down the side of the labrum, in the smaller one it is somewhat prolonged, but not so much as in the specimen figured here. The sternum is situated very far back; it is not so much pro- longed, 5™" long in the specimen figured; the episternal plates which are comparatively rather short (3™™), reach the point of the anal snout. The epiproctal plates are three on each side, viz. 5.a.6—8 and b.7—9. The abactinal plates of the odd interambulacrum are not distinctly prolonged, their number therefore being larger than usual, 15 or 16 in the specimen figured of 26™™ length. The bivial ambu- lacra begin on the abactinal side at the anterior end of the test, being thus very little separated from those of the trivium, which occupy the usual position at the anterior end of the test. The posterior paired interambulacra (rt and 4) are very curiously modified (Fig. 13). The plates a.2 and b.2 are 1 In V.a there is exceptionally no pore in the specimen figured (Pl. V. Fig. 21). The Ingolf-Expedition. IV. 2. Io 74 ECHINOIDEA. II. pushed far backwards, separated from the small inner plate at the peristome not only by the ambu- lacral plates IV. b.2—4 and Il. a.2—3, the posterior one of them being much prolonged backwards ( labrum) (labrum) ny (Sternum) Sternum) Fig. 13. Analysis of part of the test of Pourtalesia paradoxa. along the ambulacral plates V.a.1 and I. b. 1, but also by the interambulacral plates 4. a.4 and 1.b.4—5, which join the ambulacral plates V.a.1—2 and I. b. 1—2 for a long way. The plates I.a.4 and 4.b.4 are very much en- larged, and upon the whole all the plates of these interambulacra are unusually large. As in phzale these interambulacra are very much bent upon themselves, the median part being near the posterior end, where- as the upper and lower end is at the anterior end of the animal. That the interpretation of the plates given here is correct seems beyond doubt, from a cothparison with P. phiale (Fig. ro), in. which the interpretation lies quite evident. — The plates of the antero-lateral ambulacra and in- terambulacra are rather small, in accordance with the small size of the «head». The odd anterior am- bulacrum contains ca. 14 pairs of plates; I have been unable to count the number with full certainty. The invagination is comparatively small, but otherwise of the usual form. The peristome is almost round, cov- -ered with rather large plates. The mouth is a little below the middle. The apical system is situa- ted near the anterior end; from the outside I was unable to see the limits of the plates in this region with any certainty, but from the inside most of them could be distinctly seen (Fig. 14). Probably the plate just behind the large inner prolongation from the madreporic plate will really be divided in two, but I could not distinguish any line there. Also the small innermost plate of the antero-lateral ECHINOIDEA. II. 75 interambulacra (posterior series) is a little uncertain, as I was unable to see distinctly the limit betwen it and the ankylosed genital plate. There are only two genital openings, covered by long genital papille; it is probably the an- terior pair which is found, the posterior pair having disappeared, evidently because there is no room for more than one pair of genital organs. The madre- poric pores are rather few in number (Pl. VI. Fig. 17), placed behind the genital pores; in the specimen of 26™™ ' there are only two madreporic pores. The genital openings are present only in the two larger specimens and in a separated head-end. The smaller specimen shows no trace of genital openings. This species thus is not mature till a rather considerable size, since a specimen of 22™ is im- mature. on The primary spines are rather scarce, only along the actinal and abactinal keel they are close-set; also along the anterior border they are more numerous; there is no serial arrangement of the spines. They are all short, the longest scarcely reaching 3™ length; they are curved, widened towards the point, which is generally bifid (Pl. XI. Fig. 44); they are more or less serrate, generally more on Fig. 14. Apical region of Pourtalesia paradoxa. From the inside. one side than on the other. Those along the plastron are somewhat more widened than the abactinal ones; those on the posterior end of the abactinal keel bend down over the anal area. The spines within the oral invagination (Pl. XI. Fig. 21) are, as usual, coarser and stronger than those on the outside; they are curved and more or less sharply serrate along the concave side. The miliary spines (PI. XI. Fig. 43) ate likewise rather scarce in number; they are only ca. o'5™™ in length, curved towards the point which forms a somewhat widened, slightly fenestrated plate. The clavulz of the fasciole are somewhat stronger, with a rather complicated widening at the point (Pl. XI. Fig. 42). The tube-feet along the border of the invagination and those of the odd anterior ambulacrum are rather well developed, though, of course, simple. They contain rather numerous irregular spicules, (Pl. VII. Fig. 18) arranged in a longitudinal series. In the tip of the foot is generally found a small calcareous ring, evidently corresponding to the more developed cap (or, as it really is, ring) found in Pourtalesia Jeffreysi and Wandeli (comp. Pl. VII. Fig. 21). — The spheridize are placed singly behind the tube-feet along the border of the invagination. They are of the usual shape, quite smooth, except at the lower end (Pl. XI. Fig. 25). The pedicellariz are represented by three kinds, viz. tridentate, rostrate and ophicephalous; no globiferous pedicellariz have been found. The tridentate pedicellariz occur in different forms, which are, however, connected by transitions. The smaller ones (PL. XI. Fig. 2) have a short, oval blade, finely serrate along the edge, except in the lower part; they differ rather much from those of Powrt. Jef Jreyst etc. by the apophysis continuing into the edge of the blade, whereas in the other species it to* 76 ECHINOIDEA. II. ends down on the sides, not reaching the edge. There is a somewhat larger, though very inconspicuous tooth at the point. In larger specimens (Pl. XI. Fig. 24) the valves become more slender and elongated and the tooth at the point more prominent, and in the largest ones (ca. o'2™™ head) the tooth at the point is very long, the blade narrow, the edges serrate only in the outer part, where the valves join. (Pl. XI. Fig. 5.) — The rostrate pedicellarie (Pl. XI. Figs. 17, 27, 28) differ considerably from those of P.Jeffreysi and Wandeli. The blade has not the outer edge sharply set off from the sides; the point is simply rounded, set with some slender teeth, which continue some way down the side-edges; the edges are rather thick, having only a small deepening along the middle of the blade with few holes there, and sometimes near the point a transverse beam, which may be provided with a tooth. These pedicellariee may be invested in a rather thick, pigmented skin. — The ophicephalous pedicellariz (Pl. XI. Figs. 3, 6,32) are not so beautifully developed as in /efreys¢ and Wandek, though agreeing in the main points with these. The outer end of the valves is hardly widened and with rather few teeth along the edge. I have found only two specimens of them, at the anal area. Also the rostrate pedicellarize occur mainly near the anal area; the larger tridentate pedicellariz I have found within the oral invagination. Regarding the inner anatomy I cannot give full information, as I do not want to destroy one of the better preserved specimens. In a crushed specimen the intestine is preserved; the walls are, however, so incrusted with the Globigerina-mud, which fills the intestine, that it is impossible to discern the convolutions with certainty; likewise I am unable to ascertain tke presence of a diverti- culum or of the siphones, though it can scarcely be doubtful that they will be.present as in other Pourtalesie. — As in P. Jeffreyst and Wandeli the genital organs differ considerably in shape in the two sexes: large, bush-shaped in the males, simple tubes in the female. The male genital organs are situated one behind the other, far back, the posterior one at the beginning of the «body», and connect with the genital openings through very long efferent ducts, passing up the whole length of the neck. (Pl. VII. Fig. 16.) In the female the genital organs are situated in the «head», having rather short oviducts. (Pl. VII. Fig. 10). The stone-canal evidently runs as in P: /efreysi, making a great curve backwards, following the intestine into the body; to be sure I have been unable to trace it in its whole length, only the two ends of it (Pl. VII. Fig. 16), but the fact that it passes backwards through the whole length of the neck along the dorsal side does not leave any doubt that its course must upon the whole be as in P. /effreyst. There is a slight thickening, representing the axial organ, near the upper end of the canal. Below the ankylosed genital-madreporic plate there is a rather large calcareous pro- cess, to which the end of the stone-canal is fastened. The radial water-canals of the bivium are very thin and inconspicuous, those of the trivium are more distinct; ampulla I have been unable to find. This species was taken by the «Ingolf» at the following stations: St. 40 (62° oo! Lat. N. 21° 36’ Long. W. 895 fathoms 3°3 C. Bottom temp.) 1 specimen. — 68 (62°06 — 22°30 — 843 — 34 — — 1(2?) — (fragments) — 83 (62°255 — 28°30 — O12... a 35 — 4 — (two in fragments). The species is thus known only from off Southwest Iceland, from a depth of 843—g912 fathoms. That it will prove to be distributed over a large part of the warm area of the northern Atlantic can scarcely be doubted. eae a ECHINOIDEA. II. 77 The nearest relation of P. (Echinosigra) paradoxa is P. (Echinosigra) phiale; it agrees with that species in the main features of the test, as also in the pedicellarize and spines. That it is a distinct species and not only representing the grown form of P. phiale is beyond doubt, as is easily seen by a direct comparison of the largest specimen of Afzale (17™™) with the smallest specimen of parvadoxa (22™™); both these specimens show all the characteristics of their species quite distinctly developed — it would be quite unreasonable to think that a form like that figured in PI.VI. Figs. 1-—2,7 (phiale) could be trans- formed into a form like that figured in Pl. VI. Figs. 17, 19, 21 (Jaradoxa) during the growth from a - length of 17™™ to a length of 22™™. The fact alone that in the specimen of Ahzale of 17™™ the lowest _ part of the anterior end is 5™™ high, whereas in the specimen of paradoxa of 22™ the neck is only 3'5™ high, is sufficient to prove them to be two distinct species. A form like this species is, evidently, only fit to inhabit the soft bottom of the deep sea; in less quiet regions it would run the risk of breaking the neck. Lovén (On Pourtalesia. p.85) thinks that several of the more important characters of the Pourtalesiz point «though remotely, towards animal forms of another and higher type, animals of annulose differentiation». Had be known the species here described, he would probably have seen a confirmation of this view herein, except as regards the . In the British Museum are preserved only the anal snout represented in Pl. XXII. a. Figs. 3—5 and some very poor fragments connected with a genital organ; from these fragments alone it is certainly impossible to judge of the shape of the test — it seems even not very likely that they belong to one species. The figures given in the «Challenger» Ech. do not give a better proof of the shape of the test; the apical area figured in Pl. XXII.a. Fig.6 with the large thin plates, showing distinct concentric striation, recalls much more the thin plated Cystechinus clypeatus than a species of Pourtalesia, and it still more resembles the apical system of Svternopatagus as pointed out by de Meijere (Op. cit. p. 163). (I have been unable to detect the apical system among the fragments pre- served in the British Museum). I want to maintain that there is no proof in the description and figures given in the «Challenger»-Echinoidea, and neither is such proof afforded by the fragments preserved in the British Museum, that the apical system figured Pl. XXII. a Fig.6 really belongs to the same species as that to which the anal snout figured in the same plate Figs. 3—5 belongs, and I for my part think it probable that this apical system does not belong to any VPowrtalesia at all, no other species of this genus having a compact apical system. To be sure, Duncan states in his «Revision» (p. 282) that the apical system of P. miranda is compact like that of P. rosea, as can «most distinctly» be seen on the Pl. XVIII. Fig.9 of the «Revision of Echini». This figure, however, only shows four genital openings close together — it does not show anything of plates, especially of the posterior ocular plates. Until P. miranda has been rediscovered and carefully examined we may think it probable 80 ECHINOIDEA. II. that its apical system is like that of P. daguncula, evidently its nearest relation. (Lovén. On Pour- talesia. Pl. VII. Fig. 52). I have found two kinds of pedicellarie in P. rosea, viz. ophicephalous and tridentate. The ophicephalous pedicellariz (Pl. XI. Fig. 26) are rather large, with elongated, slender valves. The ter- minal widening is smaller and has fewer teeth than in P. ceratopyga. The tridentate pedicellarize (only one form found) have simply leafshaped valves; the endtooth is a little prominent, the apophysis con- tinues into the edges of the blade (Pl. XI. Fig.15). I have noticed especially that the ophicephalous pedicellarize were found on the fragment of the posterior end (— about the tridentate pedicellarize I have forgot to notice that especially, so they may perhaps belong to the other fragments —); they are sufficiently characteristic for distinguishing this species from any other of the species hitherto known of this genus — and, evidently, it is the species represented by the anal snout-fragment which must keep the name Pourtalesia rosea, not that represented by the fragment with the apical system, which is probably no Pourtalesia at ‘all. The affinities of Powrtalesia rosea must, of course, be left undecided, so long as we know almost nothing of its shape and structure of test? Pourtalesia laguncula A. Ag. and Tanneri A. Ag. have been treated above (p. 67). The question whether all the species referred to the genus Powrtalesia can rightly remain to- gether in this single genus has repeatedly been treated. In the «Challenger»-Report (p. 132): Professor Agassiz comes to the result that all the species must remain in one genus, though the character of the test seems to indicate two natural groups (P. ceratopyga and rosea forming one group, the rest of the species another); in his last great work «The Panamic Deep-Sea Echini» he is inclined to think. that «the striking differences found in the various groups of species of Pourtalesiz would seem to warrant the splitting up of the genus Pourtalesia into subsections. We might retain the name of the genus, Pourtalesia, for the bottle-shaped types allied to P. miranda, such as P. Tanneri, P. laguncula, P. Jeffreyst, and form a section of the genus for the elongate P. Ahzale and another for the stout- tested P. ceratopyga and P. rosea. P. hispida may yet be found to belong to a special genus». (Op. cit. p. 141). Duncan (Revision. p. 285) excludes from the genus P. miranda and rosea on account of their compact apical system and their postero-lateral interradia being separated dorsally. — Neither Agassiz nor Duncan propose new generic names for the subdivisions. Pomel (Classification méthodique (324) p- 40) goes more radically to work. He divides the group into four genera. Pourtalesia is restricted to the species miranda, hispida and (?) phiale; a new genus, Phyalopsis, is established for P. daguncula, another genus, Ceratophysa, for P. rosea and ceratopyga, and a third genus, Phyale, for P. Jeffreys and probably, P. carinata. I cannot agree with any of these proposed divisions of the genus; especially those proposed by Pomel seem to me very unfortunate and quite in disaccordance with the natural relations of the species. Also Duncan’s exclusion of P. miranda from the genus Pouwrtalesia is very unfortunate, first because it is the type species of the genus, and further because its apical system is, in all probability, t De Meijere (Siboga-Ech. p. 169) finds the statement that the bivial ambulacra are in mutual contact only on the abactinal side «so dass das Sternum héchstens von den benachbarten Ambulacren unterbrochen sein kann» in Duncan’s remarks Op. cit. p. 281. As far as I can see this is not the meaning of Duncan, on the contrary, he probably means to say that in P. rosea and miranda there is no contact on the abactinal side between the two postero-lateral interradia. In any case no new information on the structure of these two species is given there by Duncan. ECHINOIDEA. II. 81 disconnected like that of P. daguncula. It is beyond doubt that in a restriction of the genus the name Pourtalesia has to be retained for the group of species to which P/. miranda belongs. Thus far I agree with Agassiz, whose above cited proposition of a subdivision of the genus is evidently much more in accordance with the natural relations of the species than Duncan’s and Pomel’s subdivisions. Nevertheless I cannot fully accept Agassiz’ subdivisions either. On reviewing the characters of the species it seems to me that one feature may reasonably be taken to be of primary importance for a grouping of the species, viz. whether the bivial ambulacra are interrupted by the postero-lateral interambulacra or not. Also the shape of the test seems rather im- portant, whereas pedicellarize and spines seem to be of secondary importance. The character of the apical system, whether it is disconnected or compact, cannot be used, all the species thus far known having in fact a disconnected apical system '. The bivial ambulacra are continuous in carimata (almost certain!), phiale, paradoxa and pro- bably ceratopyga, disconnected in the other species (P. rosea, hispida and miranda are unknown in this respect, but the two latter may well be supposed to have them disconnected), Further it is to be re- marked that P. carinata differs from all the other species in having two pores and tube-feet in the ambulacral plates I.a.1 and V.b.1. (P. rosea and miranda again are unknown in this respect, though the latter may doubtless be supposed to have the pores single as in /agumcula etc.). Finally it may perhaps be a character of some importance whether the dorsal plates of the odd posterior interambu- lacrum are paired or alternating, the latter being, of course the more primitive structure; they are alternating in P. carinata and ceratopyga, paired in /Jeffreysi, Wandeli, hispida, laguncula, Tannert, phiale and paradoxa. Upon the whole this character evidently cannot, however, be taken too rigorously, the paired plates generally showing more or less distinct traces of their originally alternating condition. In typical examples the difference between these structures is very conspicuous, as seen e. g. by a comparison of Figs. 51 and 52. Pl. VII in Lovén’s: On Pourtalesia. In accordance with the characters pointed out here as the more important, I think the following grouping of the species will prove to be the natural one: 1. Bivial ambulacra continuous; two pores in the ambulacral plates I.a.1 and V.b.1. Test not especially widened or elongate. Dorsal plates of odd Peper eerste ents 1AIter Hate Be ee Oe Se ee te eee e eed. os P. carinata. 2. Bivial ambulacra continuous; one pore in the plates La.1 and V.b.1. Test very elongate; dorsal plates of odd interambulacrum paired. ss P. phiale and paradoxa. 3. Bivial ambulacra (probably) continuous; one pore (sometimes two) in the plates I.a.1 and V.b.1. Dorsal plates of odd interambulacrum alternating. LOSE HUGH * WIKEHER MHICFIOTIY..6 oo orcs ee ae eos ee OMe eR ee. re ce P. ceratopyga. 4. Bivial ambulacra disconnected; one pore in the plates I.a.r and V.b.1. Dorsal plates of odd interambulacrum paired. Test not especially widened OL CLOMGOTEG I fa ee Satie read Poets Are Pee Sake Oe ete eRe aT IES ed 'STED P. laguncula, miranda (?), Unknown: P. rosea. Tanneri, Jeffreyst, Wandelt and hispida. t Whether the genital plates be separate or not, seems to be a character of small importance, since both cases may occur in the same species. Likewise the presence or absence of the labrum is of small importance, as shown by its great variation in P, Jeffreys? and Wandeli, The Ingolf-Expedition. IV. 2. Il 82 ECHINOIDEA. II. If we take these four groups to represent genera, or at least subgenera, which seers not at all unreasonable, the latter group must keep the name Povrtalesia. Of the names proposed by Pomel two become synonyms only of Pourtalesia, viz. Phyalopsis (for laguncula) and Phyale (for Jeffreysz). Only the name Ceratophysa may be retained; /. rosea is named as the first species of this genus, but the diagnosis is made from ceratopyga. The latter species must then be taken as the genotype. For the two other groups I may propose the names: Helgocystis and Echinosigra. The old genus Pourtalesia is thus divided into four genera (or subgenera), viz.: Helgocystis n. g. with the species carzmata (A. Ag.). Echinosigra n. g. with the species phiale (W. Th.) (genotype) and parvadoxa (Mrtsn.). Ceratophysa Pomel with the species ceratopyga (A. Ag.). Pourtalesia A. Ag. with the species mzranda A. Ag. (genotype), daguncula A. Ag. Tanneri A. Ag., JSeffreyst W.Th., Wandeli Mrtsn. and hispida A. Ag. Perhaps the species /efreyst, Wandeli and hispida may yet prove to form a separate genus, which would then get the name Phyale Pomel.; for the present, however, it seems not necessary to separate these species from the genus Pourtalesia, though it must be conceded that they form a dis- tinct group in that genus, differing from the other species in the shape of the test. P. Zanneri, how- ever, is in some way intermediate between the two groups (by its narrow anal snout). That it should be necessary to make P. hispida the type of a separate genus there is no reasen to suppose. Spatagocystis Challengeri A. Ag. has been very carefully worked out, especially: in the «Panamic Deep-Sea Echini» (p. 141), as regards the structure of the test. Three kinds of pedicellariz have been figured in the «Challenger»-Report (Pl. XLII. 1012 and XLV. 39—43), though — as is mostly the case in that work — not mentioned in the text. I have found (on specimens examined in the British Museum) two kinds of pedicellariz, viz. tridentate and rostrate. Further I find in my preparation a single globiferous and an ophicephalous pedicellaria resembling exactly those of Uvechinus Wyvillit. As the specimens examined proceed from St.147 from which station also Urech. Wyvillit is recorded, I think these pedicellariz do really belong to that species, having only accidentally got between those of Spatagocystis. The tridentate pedicellarize are richly developed, occurring in at least two different forms, viz. one with simply leafshaped, more or less slender valves with the apophysis continuing into the edge of the blade (Pl. X. Fig. 20 represents a small specimen of the slender form; larger specimens are rather similar to those of Echinocrepis cuneata), and another with rather short, broad valves, nar- rowed in the lower part of the blade and terminating in a more or less prominent hook (PI. X. Fig. 10); this is evidently the form figured in the «Challenger»-Report Pl. XLII.10 and Pl. XLV.39—40 as a «large-headed» pedicellaria. I have not found so much meshwork in this as figured in the Pl. XLV. 40 of the «Challenger»; there is often nothing at all. The form figured in Pl. XLII. 12, evidently an- other form of tridentate pedicellarie, I have not seen. The rostrate pedicellariz, figured as «short- headed, toothed, cup-pronged» pedicellariz (Pl. XLII. 11 and XLV. 41 and 43), are of a quite typical form, with the outer edge of the rather short and broad blade provided with ca. 10—16 thick teeth (Pl. X. Fig. 18); the edge of the basal part is generally closely serrate, though not always so regularly as in the specimen here figured. The stalk is more or less thorny (Pl. X. Fig. 35). — There is a very ECHINOIDEA. I. 83 distinct calcareous cap in the point of the tube-feet (Pl. VII. Fig. 17), though not formed by one plate. The spicules are of the usual form, lying in two close longitudinal series. Echinocrepis cuneata A. Ag. In this species the bivial ambulacra are evidently uninterrupted («Chall.»-Ech. Pl. XXXYV. a. 10), as is also pointed out by de Meijere («. Agassiz thus evidently seems to consider the Pourtalesie as the centre from which all the other Irregular Echinoids have developed; that the group itself has developed from one of those named does not seem to be the meaning of the famous Echinologist — the Pourtalesiz are evidently regarded as «embryonic» forms, which have given rise to all the different groups, to which the affi- nities are pointed out, since the «affinities» probably must mean real genetic relationship. I think I need not here point out in a more detailed manner that the more prominent characters of the Pour- talesicee are highly specialized, not at all embryonic. ‘But Professor Agassiz does not seem to take into consideration that the different characters are not of the same value; structural characters of the highest systematic importance and irrelevant, vague resemblances are regarded as equivalent . criteria of relationship. (Comp. my remarks on this theme in the Echinoidea of the Danish Siam- Exped. p. 50.) : Also Urechinus naresianus is held by Agassiz («Blake»-Ech. p. 52) to be a representative of the oldest Spatangids, «leading us little by little to Spatangoid genera in which the ambulacra become more or less petaloid, as in Homolampas, Paleopneustes and the like, till we get the modern type of Spatangus proper, with well defined petaloid ambulacra and a highly developed subanal fasciole» ete. It is evident that the quite rudimentary abactinal tube-feet and pores in Urechinus is a highly speci- alized feature, which may possibly give rise to further stages in which these tube-feet and pores com- pletely disappear; but it is rather inconceivable how these rudimentary pores and tube-feet, which doubtless represent a reduction from the more primitive condition, where the pores were double and the tube-feet well developed, should again give rise to petaloid structures with large, double pores and well developed tube-feet. Also the fascioles have doubtless developed separately in several groups — in the same manner as the polyporous condition of the ambulacra among the Zchinina. — The same objections may be made against regarding Calymne as holding «an intermediate position between the Pourtalesiz proper and such genera as Paleopneustes and Palzeotropus», and against finding in Cystechinus (Urechinus), Pourtalesia — and «the allied genera Paleotropus, Neolampas and the like» a proof of «the affinities of the Spatangoids with the Echinolampade». («Chall.»-Ech. p. 148). — Upon the whole I cannot join Professor Agassiz when expressing his joy of «how the structure of so many of the Spatangoid forms is satisfactorily explained by the different genera of Pourtalesiz collected by the «Challenger» and how greatly the knowledge of the members of this family has helped us to ECHINOIDEA. II. 89 understand the true relationship not only. of many aberrant groups of Spatangoids, but also their relationship to the Clypeastroids and Echinolampade». («Chall.»-Ech. p. 148). I give here a graphic representation of the mutual relationship of the Spatangoids, as I under- stand it. It will be seen that my view of the Meridosternata is in rather close accordance with that represented in the tabular view of the Meridosterni given by Lambert. I may notice expressly that it is not meant as a genealogical tree of the genera. As for the families, I do not doubt that they have really been derived from one another in the direction here indicated. Plexechinus Pourtalesia Echinosigra Spatangidze 3 Cystechinus (?)? Spatagocystis | Ceratophysa Paleeostomatidee Pilematechinus Cystocrepis Helgocystis Palzeopneustidze Urechinus. Echinocrepis Aéropidze we Bee Calymnide Sternopatagus ii ps NG Stereopneustes yas 4; pero fa % 7 hs @ ° Ss . iB Ananchytidze SP 2 DR OM Merjg , Collyritidz , Ster, ee a / Bree Val ‘Se oe + Cassiduloid Clypeastroidea = sonics ni dane eine el Holectypoidea , Diademina t Etudes morph. sur le plastron des Spatangides. As for Lambert’s remark (Op. cit. p.93) that the Pourtalesie must form a small separate family «reliée par Urechinus aux vrais Ananchytide et rattachée aux Spatangide par Paleotropus et Physaster>, I must refer to the above remarks against seeking transitions between the Pourtalesiz and the Amphisternata. Lambert is here, evidently, in disaccord with the views otherwise expressed throughout that excellent paper. 2 This genus is quite insufficiently known and possibly does not really belong to this family. (Comp. above p. 46, 49). 3 Sensu latiori, comprising Spa/angina, Brissina ete. The Ingolf-Expedition. IV. 2. I2 go ECHINOIDEA. I. Suborder Amphisternata. Fam. Spatangide. It may be expressly stated that by including here in the «family» Sfatangide all the genera mentioned in the following, viz. Aéropsis, Hemiaster, Schizaster, Spatangus, Echinocardium and Bris- sopsis, besides some few others, as Aceste, Pertaster which I have taken the opportunity to discuss, I do not mean to maintain that all these genera do really belong to one and the same family. It is only a provisional arrangement; so long as I have not studied more carefully all the recent genera of Amphisternous Spatangoids, or at least so many of them as are available for me, I do not want to give my view of their classification. I hope to be able to do so in Part II of the Siam-Echinoidea. Aéropsis nom. nov. The name Aérope by which Wyv. Thomson designated the curious Spatangoid described by him in «The Atlantic» I. p. 381 was preoccupied and thus cannot be kept for the Spatangoid. It was first used by Leach, though only as a Manuscript name, dévofe dbidens, for a crab of the genus Macrophthalmus Vatr. (Macr. parvimanus Latr.)* Later on, in 1860, it was employed by Albers for a pulmonate Gastropod of the Fam. Helicoidea (Aérope caffra; South Africa)?. It is thus beyond doubt that the Spatangoid named Aérofe in 1877 must have another name. I therefore propose the name Aéropsis, which recalls the old familiar name so much that this change of name can scarcely give much trouble. 25. Aéropsis rostrata (Wyv. Thomson). Pl. V. Figs. 8—1o, 15, 20, 22. Pl. XV. Figs. 1—2, 5, 8, 13, I9g—2I, 29, 37, 40, 43, 52. Synonym: Aérope rostrata Wyv. Thomson. Literature: A. M. Norman: Crustacea, Tunicata, Polyzoa, Echinodermata etc. Biology of the «Valorous» Cruise 1875. Proc. Royal Soc. 25. 1876. p. 211. — Wyv. Thomson: The Atlantic. I. p. 381. Fig. 99. — A. Agassiz: «Challenger»-Echinoidea. p. 192. Pl. XXXIIL Figs. 6—13, XXXIII. a. 8—12, XXXIX. 23, XLI. 7—8. (Non.: Pl. X XXIII. 1—5.) — Verrill: Results of the Explorations made by the Steamer «Albatross» off the Northern Coast of U.S. in 1883. (426). p. 539. In his description of this species Professor Agassiz points out that his specimens differ con- siderably in outline, as is also very well seen in the figures given on Pl. XXXIII of the «Challenger>- Echinoidea. Nevertheless he does not regard them as different species, and in his recent work «The Panamic Deep-Sea Echini» (p. 194) it is maintained that the differences in outline of the specimen(s) figured on the Pl. XXXIII of the «Challenger»-Echinoidea are all «compatible with differences due to rt List of specimens of Crustacea in the British Museum. 1847. p. 37. 2 Tryon: Structural and systematic Conchology. 1884. III. p. 18. 7 . : d ( | ; : j ECHINOIDEA. IL , gt age». This, indeed, seems highly improbable! The smaller specimen (20) has its genital pores well developed, and thus cannot be regarded as a quite immature specimen. But a change so enormous as would be necessary to make the short form like the elongated during its growth from a size of zo™™ to 43™" would be quite unparalleled among Echinoids — and that change should even take place after the animal had become sexually ripe. Adding hereto that the smaller, short form is from the Atlantic, whereas the large, elongated form proceeds from the Arafura Sea (Kee Islands, «Chall.» St. r91); that the latter closely resembles the pacific species A. /ulva, and further that a specimen of 34™™ length from the « — 67 (61°30° — 22°30° = — 9755 — 300 — —)2 — —;68 (62°06' — 22°30 — 843 = 34 — —)r =-— — 69 (62°40! — ahi — FAD vic Fry tod Detentige ae He ine Unfortunately several of the,specimens were in a more or less broken condition. — The spe- cies was further taken by the «Thor» at 62° 57’ Lat. N. 19° 58’ Long. W. 975 M. (1903) and by «Michael Sars», 61° 4o’ Lat. N. 3° 11’ Long. E. 220 fathoms, 6°3 bottom temperature (Ad. Jensen. 1902). The latter locality (the Shetland-Norway ridge) is rather surprising and may indicate the possibility of the species occurring along Norway. (Comp. Echinus Alexandrt). The geographical distribution of this species is thus the Northern Atlantic, from the Davis Strait to the Caribbean Sea and from South of Iceland to the Azores. It belongs to the warm t This feature, combined with the ethmophract apical system, the 4 genital pores, the difference in the pedicellariz (evidently the least important character) and the very great difference in the whole shape and appearance, proves beyond doubt that Lovén was quite right in maintaining that the antarctic forms; ddatws cavernosus etc. cannot be referred to the genus Hemiaster, as done by Professor Agassiz. «An extraneous form like this, if suffered to remain in the otherwise homo- geneous group of true Hemiasters, is sure to vitiate its integrity, and the mixed assemblage thus set up for a natural genus, if taken on trust, cannot fail to mislead when the question is to trace out comparatively its former geological and actual geographical distribution». (lovén. On Pourtalesia. p.73). In his last work, «The Panamic Deep-Sea Echini>, Agassiz recognizes the correctness of Lovén’s views, while Déderlein (Echinoidea d. deutsch. Tiefsee-Exp.) still refers the antarctic forms to Hemiaster, without entering upon the question, however. This question will be treated at more length in my Re ports on the Echinoidea of the German and Swedish South-Polar Expeditions). : 102 ECHINOIDEA. II. area. The bathymetrical distribution is from 220 (or 170, comp. below, AH. M@entz¢) to 1700 fathoms («Talisman»). Besides the species 1. expergitus four more recent species of the genus Hemiaster (excl. A batus) have been described, viz. Alemiaster gibbosus A. Ag. zonatus A. Ag. both from the «Challenger», H. Mentzi A. Ag, from the «Blake», and A. florigerus Studer, from the «Gazelle». (The Hemuaster apicatus Woods is referred by Woods himself to the subgenus Ahznobdrissus and therefore, being no true Hemiaster, does not concern us here). As for the first and third of these species it seems rather probable that they will prove to be synonyms only of H/. expergitus, : In his description of Hemiaster gibbosus («Chall.»-Ech. p. 184, Pl. XX. 5—16, 22) Agassiz does not point out by which features this species is distinguished from /Z expergitus, and a careful analysis of his description and figures does not reveal any good distinguishing characters either. De Meijere («Siboga»-Ech. p. 182) has had some specimens of 1. gzbbosus, but he only remarks that he finds them answering well to the description given by Agassiz. Through the kindness of Professor M. Weber I have received one of these specimens, 20™™ in length; I have thus been able to compare the species with equal-sized specimens of //. exfergitus, and finally I have examined the «Challenger»-specimens in the British Museum. The comparison of 47. gibbosus and expergitus gives the following results. The shape of the test is the same; to be sure I have seen no specimen of expergitus of the form shown in Fig. 6. Pl. XX of the «Challenger»-Echini, all ‘the specimens being wider in front than behind, or (the small ones) almost elliptic. But Agassiz himself states that the outline is variable, and the outline ofthe specimen figured in Pl, XX. 5! is almost quite as in expergitus. (Comp. Pl. II. Fig. 1). Evidently the form of the test thus does not give any distinguishing character. Agassiz points out that the plates of the lateral posterior interambulacra are comparatively bare — but in expergitus they may be quite as bare, and I am unable to find any difference herein between the specimen of gibbosus before me and equal-sized expergitus. — «The bivium is separated from the trivium by two large intercalated interambulacral plates». I suppose, that by these Fig. 19. Abactinal part of the left posterior Interambulacrum (4), of Hemiaster gibbosus; comp. with and posterior petal seen in the Fig. 9. Pl. XX. The figure, however, must Pl. XX. Fig.9 of the «Challenger»- Echinoidea. are meant the two large plates within the fasciole between the anterior certainly be wrong. It would be a quite exceptional thing to find in this place two large, paired plates; I find these interambulacra in the specimen before me of the usual structure (Fig. 19), the fasciole passes over the third and fourth plate, quite as in expergitus of the same size. It could not be made out with certainty, how this is in the «Challenger»-specimens, but I do not doubt in the slightest that they will show the usual structure. (In the largest specimen of exfergitus the fasciole traverses the 5th—7th plate in these interambu- lacra). The «intermiliary granulation», which Professor Agassiz figures (Pl. XX. Fig. 13), I am unable to find either in the specimen of gzbbosus or in expergitus of corresponding size. In the largest speci- men of expfergitus it is well developed, though not so close as in the figure quoted. t In the explanation of Plates (p. 292) it is stated that Fig. 5 and 6 represent the same specimen which is evidently impossible and in contradiction to the text (p. 184). _ ECHINOIDEA. II. 103 From the description given by A gassiz it is thus impossible to find how to distinguish 7. g7bdosus from expergitus. A comparison of the figures seems to give a somewhat better result, the petals and the odd ambulacrum showing some difference: In the specimen of gzbbosus figured by Agassiz in Pl. XX. 5 and 9 (ca. 30°" in length) the posterior petals are only a little shorter than the anterior ones, and the number of pores in both petals is almost the same. In the largest specimen of expergitus (37) the posterior petals are only half as long as the anterior ones and the number of pores in the posterior petals is likewise only about half that in the anterior; further in expergitus the inner ca.7 pairs of pores in the median (anterior) row of the anterior petals are small, in e7bbosus, according to Fig. 9, they are all large and conjugated. The number of plates in the odd ambulacrum within the fasciole is in gebdosus (ac- cording to Fig.9) ca. 18, in expergitus 29. — These differences look very good. If, however, we com- pare the specimen of gibdosus of 20™™ before me with equal-sized expergitus, these differences become very slight. In both I find the anterior petals twice as long as the posterior and with the double number of pairs of pores. In gibbosus I find the 4 inner pairs in the median row of the anterior petals small (in expfergitus about 7). In the odd anterior ambulacrum I find in gzbdosus 14—15 plates within the fasciole, in expergitus 17—18. And in the specimens from the «Challenger» in the British Museum the posterior petals are only about half as long as the anterior ones, and the inner 5—7 pores of the inner series of the anterior petals are small, not conjugate. No specimen in the British Museum corresponds to the Fig.g. Pl. XX of the «Challenger»-Echini. These differences thus become so slight that they seem rather inappropriate for distinguishing two species thereby. But other distinguishing characters do not seem to be found in the structure of the test. The fasciole is alike in shape, like- wise the spines. To be sure the labrum, according to Agassiz’ Fig.6 would seem to give some differ- ence: Its posterior end reaches on the right side the middle of plate 3 in the adjoining ambulacrum, on the left side to the middle of plate 2. As, however, this figure gives in any case a quite wrong representation of the plates in the left posterior ambulacrum (I), it probably cannot be relied upon for the right side either, the more so as in the specimens in the British Museum the labrum reaches only to the middle of the second ambulacral plates of the adjoining series. The specimen from the «Siboga» likewise agrees exactly with equal-sized exfergitus in this respect. — The number of buccal plates and the form of the peristome is the same in both of them. The tube-feet and spicules are alike. — The globiferous pedicellarie (not seen in the «. 1 quite agree with the eminent author herein, and having examined the specimens in the British Museum I am able to add some more differences to those now found by Professor Agassiz between the «Challenger» specimens and the true P. Himicola. The labrum ends off the first adjoining ambulacral plates. There are four large subanal tube-feet. One specimen has two genital pores, the other has four, the two anterior being quite small. The latero-anal fasciole has quite disappeared in one specimen, in the other there are distinct traces of it. The frontal tube-feet have a well developed disk, strongly lobate in the edge, the rosette-plates reaching only the beginning of the lobes. The spicules are very numerous, rather much branched, otherwise like those of “imicola. The globiferous pedicellariz are of the Schizasterid type, with a very large space within the blade (Pl. XIV. Figs. 1, 4); there is one tooth on either side of the terminal opening. The stalk has a limb above, where the muscles from the head are fastened, and a small ring below. The tridentate pedicellariz (Pl. XIV. Fig. 21) are rather similar to those of P. Limicola, viz. the slender form. The long and slender valves join only at the point; the edge is in the lower part very coarsely and irregularly serrate; there is a little meshwork, sometimes rather coarse, in the blade. Rostrate pedicellaria have not been found; the ophicephalous pedicellariz (Pl. XIV. Figs. 5, 36) are of the usual Spatangoid type, and there is a prolongation from the lowermost of the arcs. The stalk is not distinctly cupshaped above. The tri- phyllous pedicellariz do not present peculiar features. The differences pointed out by Professor Agassiz and here, together with the geographical distribution: one a deep-sea form from the Gulf of Mexico, the other a littoral form from the Arafura Sea, leave no doubt that this is another species; if it be a new species is not so certain. It is very like the Schizaster Jukesti Gray both in the characters of the test and of the pedicellariz, and even the locality is the same; indeed, I think it almost beyond doubt that it is really identical with that species. — (In «Revision of Echini» Schizaster Juwkesii is made a synonym of Sch. ventricosus (lacu- nosus 1,.); this is, however, certainly not correct; the verification thereof will be given in Part II of the Siam-Echinoidea). Whether Schzzaster Jukesit ought really be reckoned to the genus Periaster, as is done, in fact, by Agassiz in the «Challenger»-Echinoidea, is not easy to determine, these genera being upon the whole very closely related. Perhaps the globiferous pedicellariz may indicate the correctness of referring Sch. Jwkesii to Periaster; in any case they differ considerably from those of Schizaster lacunosus a. 0. (comp. below). But upon the whole I do not venture to enter in a more detailed manner on a discussion of the rather difficult question of the genus Periaster, my knowledge of the fossil forms being too insufficient. 27. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis (Diib. Kor.). PLI. Figs.6—7. Pl XIII. Pl. XIV. Figs. 3, 7, 11, 13—16, 18,.20, 24—25, 31, 37, 39, 43, 46, 50—5I. Synonyms: Brissus fragilis Diib. Kor. . Tripylus fragilis Sars. Principal literature: Diiben & Koren: Skandinaviens Echinodermer. 1844. p. 280. Tab. X. 47— 49. — Gray: Catalogue Rec. Echinida. 1855. p.61. — Liitken: Bidrag til Kundskab om Echiniderne. p.175 (107). — Sars: Norges Echinodermer. p. 96. — Agassiz: Rev. of Echini. p.157, 363. Pl. XXI. 3, XXVI. 42. — «Challenger»-Echinoidea. p. 201, «Blake»-Ech. p.74. Pl. XXVIII 8—14. — Lovén: Etudes ECHINOIDEA. II. 109 sur les Ech. Pl. XII. 102, XXXI. — On Pourtalesia. Pl. X. 100. — Bell: Catalogue Brit. Ech. p. 164. — Hoyle: Revised List Brit. Ech. p. 422. — Koehler: Note prélim. sur les Echinides, Ophiures et Cri- noidées rec. en 1898—g9, «Princesse Alice». Bull. Soc. Zool. de Fr. rgor. p.gg. — Grieg: Nordlige Norges Echinodermer. p. 32. — Déderlein: Echinoiden d. deutschen Tiefsee-Expedition. p. 253. Taf. L. Fig. 2. — Fauna Arctica. Seeigel. p. 385. For other less important literary references see «Rev. of Ech.» and Bell’s Catalogue. This species is very well described by Diiben and Koren and later on by Agassiz, so that very little remains to be added as regards the structure of the test. — The shape of the test is rather variable; sometimes it is more rounded, sometimes more elongated; not seldom it is unequally developed, the right side projecting beyond the left in front, though somewhat less than is generally the case in Spatangus purpureus. — In «Revision of Ech.» Pl. XXI. 3 is figured a specimen in which the left side projects beyond the right. There can, however, scarcely be any doubt that this figure (photograph) has been reproduced in inverted position; this is especially shown by the genital pores: in this figure there are two genital pores on the right side, whereas they are really found on the left side, as stated by Agassiz himself, «Rev. of Ech.» p. 263 —: «three genital openings, right anterior obliterated». — (A similar inverted reproduction is found in the «Hassler>- KEchinoidea. Pl. Il. 4, Nacospatangus gracilis, and, probably, Pl. 1V.6,8, «emiaster» Philippii). — The height of the test likewise is rather variable, especially the abactinal keel formed by the posterior interambulacrum may differ very much, being sometimes quite indistinct, sometimes very prominent. The length of the posterior petals is generally scarcely one third of that of the anterior ones; in a specimen from Bergen, however, they are more than half as long as the anterior ones, and the apical system in this specimen is subcentral, whereas the apical system is otherwise near the posterior end, (This specimen is figured in Pl. 1 Fig. 7, the Fig.6 showing a normal specimen of the same size for comparison). In the same specimen the posterior part of the labrum is longer than usual, reaching to the 2. ambulacral plate on one side, to the posterior edge of the 1. ambulacral plate on the other side, whereas it normally ends off the middle of the 1. ambulacral plate. Also the plastron is broader than usual. Upon the whole this specimen differs: very considerably from the typical form and would undoubtedly have been made the type of a distinct species, had it come from a more distant, less well known locality; but, as the Norwegian specimens otherwise do not show these characters, such a single specimen can certainly only be regarded as an abnormal, probably atavistic case. But it might well be worth looking out for similar specimens — as, of course, the existence of another species of Schizaster in these regions, cannot be declared impossible. — Evidently the specimen of which Grieg (Op. cit.) gives some measurements has some resemblance to the above mentioned, though the posterior petals are not so long as here. According to the statements of Agassiz («Blake»-Ech. p. 74) there is «considerable variation in the distinctness of the lateral fasciole as it passes under the anal system. In some cases it stops sud- denly near the level of the anal system; in others it can be faintly traced as an indistinct, irregular anal fasciole; in others the anal fasciole is most clearly marked. These differences do not depend on size, but specimens from one locality are usually similarly affected». Under the description of Schzzaster orbignyanus («Blake»-Ech. p. 76) Agassiz further says: «It is interesting to note that in the specimens 110 ECHINOIDEA. II. of S. fragilis dredged off our eastern coast, the anal fasciole disappears first, leaving only a part of the lateral fasciole extending from the peripetalous fasciole towards the anal system». On all the numerous specimens of .S. fragilis, I have examined, I have found the anal fasciole distinct, whereas the lateral fasciole is more or less rudimentary in a few (3) specimens from St. 32. In two of these specimens the lateral fasciole is quite wanting on the one side, only partly distinct, not reaching the peripetalous fasciole, on the other side; on the third specimen it is wanting on both sides, only: the anal part remaining distinct. But specimens without the anal part of the fasciole I have never seen; my experiences thus are not in accordance with those of Agassiz. Evidently the specimens without the anal part of the fasciole deserve to be reexamined; it is not impossible that they will prove to belong to another species. (Comp. HYemzaster zonatus, p. 105). The pedicellarize of Sch. fragilis were until recently almost quite unknown. Agassiz (Revision of Ech. Pl. XXVI. Fig. 42) figures a valve of a pedicellaria, which he finds (p. 666) «resembling the gemmiform type of the Echinide» (in the explanation of plates called «stout-headed pedicellaria»); it is the rostrate form. The tridentate pedicellaria were seen by Koehler (Op. cit), who only states that they are of the usual form. Lastly, however, Professor Déderlein (Op. cit.) has given very im- portant information on all the pedicellariz (except the ophicephalous) of this species and of most of the other recent species of Schizaster. My own observations, which were made about two years before Professor Déderlein’s work was published, agree almost completely with his. Having, however, several additional remarks to make, I may give my original description almost unaltered; likewise I give most of the figures of pedicellari made at that time. The figures given by Déderlein are, of course, quite correct, being photographs; but several important details are not seen, so that my figures will probably not be found superfluous. . The globiferous pedicellariz (Pl. XIV. Figs. 14, 16, 24,51) are rather conspicuous. The valves are enclosed by a thick, evidently glandular coat of skin, which continues down over the upper part of the stalk, covering the great muscles which go from the valves to a thickening of the stalk, a little above the middle. Also at the lower end of the stalk there is a generally less distinct thickening for the fastening of the basal muscle. The stalk is rather thick and compact; the head rests directly upon the rounded upper end of the stalk. The valves are very characteristic (Pl. XIV. Figs. 14,16). As in the globiferous pedicellariz of the Cidarids there is a large space in the interior of the valves, pro- bably enclosing a poison gland, passing far down into the basal part, almost to the articular surface. The opening of this space is at the point of the valve at the base of the single rather large and compressed endtooth; the opening may be at its right or left side indifferently, that side with the opening being somewhat hollowed. Very seldom abnormal globiferous pedicellarize occur, whose valves end in two diverging teeth between which the opening lies (Pl. XIV. Fig. 24); sometimes pedicellarize are found in which one of the valves ends in two teeth, the others in the usual way. Generally these pedicellariz are strongly pigmented, often almost black, and, where they occur in greater numbers, very conspicuous. They may be very numerous especially on the anal area, on the abactinal side in the posterior interambulacrum and along the petals; on the actinal side they are very seldom found. I have found them in specimens of only ca. 4™™ length. They differ rather much in size, the thick part (head and upper part of the stalk) reaching about 1™™ length. ECHNIOIDEA. II. II I The rostrate pedicellariz (Pl. XIV. Figs. 11, 15, 43) have the valves very little widened in the point; they generally end in 6 small teeth; sometimes they are even narrowed in the point ending with only 4 small teeth. Not seldom they are 4-valved (Pl. XIV. Fig. 43). This kind of pedicellariz is especially developed round the mouth and in the anterior ambulacrum; also on the anal area they often occur, but generally only small ones. Upon the whole these pedicellariz are smaller and much less conspicuous than the globiferous ones; the length of the head up to ca.o5™™. The neck is short, especially in the larger ones; the stalk is thick and compact. The tridentate pedicellarie (Pl. XIV. Figs. 3, 7, 18, 20, 25, 37, 46, 50) are uncommonly richly devel- oped, the valves varying from simply leafshaped to almost tubular, but all intermediate forms occur, so that separate forms of them cannot be distinguished. As the more typical form I must regard those with large leafshaped valves, narrowed in the lower part, widened towards the point, where usually some coarse serrations are found; the edge of the lower, narrowed part may be almost smooth, with only a few large teeth or more closely serrate. There may be a more or less developed meshwork in the bottom of the blade. (This form is represented in Figs. 18, 46,50. Pl. XIV and in Déderlein’s Fig. 2.b,f£ Pl. L). Another form has the narrow lower part of the blade more distinctly set off from the outer, widened part, and the point of the blade more or less distinctly bent inwards (Pl. XIV. Fig. 25). Quite small specimens may be simply leafshaped (Pl. XIV. Fig. 20, and Déderlein’s Fig. 2.¢), or more or less recalling the rostrate pedicellariz (Pl. XIV. Figs.3,7) and perhaps they ought really to be reckoned to that type; this, however, cannot be decided and is of no importance. — Large tri- dentate pedicellariz with almost tubular blade (Pl. XIV. Fig. 37) I have found only in a large specimen from the Faroe Islands — perhaps it is an abnormal form. The large tridentate pedicellarize are found almost exclusively on the actinal side, round the peristome and along the ambulacra. They have a well developed neck; the stalk is rather compact, with a more or less distinct «milled» ring below. Ophicephalous pedicellariz (Pl. XIV. Fig. 39) I have found only on quite young specimens of 3—6™™ length. They are of the usual Spatangoid type, without neck. The blade is broadly triangular, continuing almost down to the articular surface, the apophysis being short and broad. The triphyllous pedicellarize (Pl. XIV. Fig. 31) are of the usual form, with finely serrate edge. The sphzeridie continue, as is usually the case, along the posterior ambulacra to the anal area; they do not present features of specific value, and are almost spherical, smooth or grooved. — The spicules (Pl. XIV. Fig. 13.a.b) are irregular, spinous rods; in the large tube-feet of the anterior ambulacrum they are more complicated, their protuberances being larger and partly uniting so as to form fenestrate plates. Lovén (Pourtalesia. Pl. X. Fig. 100) figures the rosette-plates as reaching only halfway out in the lobes; I find them generally reaching almost to the point of the lobes. In the «Blake»-Echini (p. 74) Professor Agiassiz describes young specimens of Sch. fragilis of 6 and 1o™™ length. The «Ingolf»-Expedition has taken (especially at Station 28) several small specimens, the youngest of which are only 2™ in length. I am thus able to give a rather full account of the development of this species from a size of 2™™ upwards, a development which proves of no small interest. (Pl. XIII). In specimens of 2™ length (Pl. XIII. Figs. 2,4) the anal system is almost in the middle of the abactinal side; it is, in fact endocyclic, closely joining the two large anterior genital plates, while the 112 ECHINOIDEA. II. posterior ambulacra end off the posterior edge of the anal area. The posterior genital plates are not developed; the ocular plates as well as the abactinal plates of the paired ambulacra are rather indis- tinct, but the course of the ambulacra is sufficiently distinct. The same, from a phylogenetic point of view, highly interesting construction of the apical area has been described and figured for Adatus cavernosus by Lovén (On Pourtalesia. p. 20—22, Pl. XIV) and by Agassiz (Panamic Deep-Sea Echini. p. 211—13. Pl.gg). The plates of the anterior ambulacrum are comparatively large and elongate, with single pores, and only two tube-feet in each series of plates have as yet appeared within the fasciole. They are rather large as shown in Fig. 3. Pl. XIII, but can by no means be said to be of very promi- nent size. Especially interesting is the fasciole, which consists only of a broad band encircling both apical and anal system, as is also the case in Abatus cavernosus of a corresponding size. The actinal system is quite embryonal, round (Pl. XIII. Fig. 4), the labrum not at all prominent. The sternum is typically amphisternous,' though the plate 5.a.2 is longer than b.2. The test is almost oval in circum- ference, with a very slight sinuation at the front, but the frontal ambulacrum is not deepened. The shape of the test is rather flat, not at all globular, as is maintained by Professor Agassiz («Blake»- Echini. p. 78) to be the case in young Schizasters. In the course of the further development the following changes take place. The postero-lateral ambulacra and the two series of plates of the odd posterior interambulacrum grow forwards along” each side of the anal system, which is by and by pushed backwards, and a pair of interambulacral plates develop between the two large genital plates and the anal system (Pl. XIII. Fig. 1). The fasciole now presents a very important change: from the primary fasciole has developed a transverse branch, | passing over the postero-lateral interambulacra and between the apical and anal system. This trans- verse band, together with the anterior part of the primary fasciole develops into the peripetalous fasciole, whereas the part of the primary fasciole posterior to the transverse band becomes the latero- anal fasciole. — This stage is found at a size of 3™™ length (Pl. XIII. Fig. 1). — Plates are now con- tinually developing in the odd posterior interambulacrum, the new ones appearing at the posterior end of the two large genital plates. Thereby the.anal area is pushed more and more backwards, till it comes on the posterior edge of the test and is at last not at all seen from above. These inter- ambulacral plates between the anal area and the apical system form the prominent abactinal keel; the shape of the test is thereby very much altered, as seen by a comparison of the Figs. 9 and 7, Pl. XIII, representing side views of the test in specimens of 3 and 4°5™™ length. The latero-anal fasciole, of course, is gradually pushed more backwards, as it must retain its original relation to the anal area, viz. passing just behind it. In specimens of ca. 6™" length its anal part cannot be seen from above any longer. We may now follow the development of the abactinal ambulacra. The odd anterior ambulacrum, which is at first not much broader than the paired lateral ambulacra, soon enlarges considerably, the plates becoming much broader and comparatively lower. The sinuation in the front edge becomes gradually deeper, and at the same time the ambulacrum deepens, forming a groove, bordered by the adjoining antero-lateral interambulacra. At about 4™™ length the pores become double, the outer pore t Agassiz (loc. cit.) says of the quite similar sternum in the young Ada/us cavernosus that it is «almost a true me- ridosternum». As I have pointed out above (p. 84), it is not at all meridosternous but typically amphisternous. ECHINOIDEA. IL 113 constantly being larger than the inner one in each pair. The number of plates increases considerably; whereas at 2™™ length only 2—3 pairs of plates are developed between the fasciole and the ocular plate, there are 17 pairs in a specimen of 11™ length. The fasciole here keeps its original position, close to the anterior edge. — As said above it was very difficult to trace the exact number of plates of the abactinal paired ambulacra in the smaller specimens. From a size of ca. 4™™ length there was no difficulty in tracing the exact number and shape of these plates; while therefore the figures 1, 2 and 5. Pl. XIII do not claim to be quite exact in this respect, the figures of the later stages give them correctly. In the younger stages no pores at all are developed in these plates; at a size of 4°5™™ (Pl. XIII. Fig. 8) I find the pores very faintly indicated in the posterior series of the antero-lateral am- bulacra. In specimens of 5°5™™ and 65™™ they are distinctly developed in both series of these ambu- lacra (Pl. XIII. Figs. 10, 12). At a size of 7:5™™ I find the pores of the posterior series of plates double, while those of the anterior series are still simple — a very interesting stage, which is kept for life by the genus Agassizia. In specimens of g™™ the pores are double in both series, though the pores as well as the plates of the posterior series are still considerably larger. The antero-lateral ambulacra have thus attained the petaloid condition, and their further development cosisists only in the enlarging of the plates and pores and the gradual deepening (already at ca. 6™™ the deepening is rather dis- tinctly seen), besides, of course, the adding of new plates at their upper end. — The development of the posterior petals begins somewhat later, on account of the original position of the transverse fasc- iole close behind the apical system. In a specimen of 5°5™™ (Pl. XIII. Fig. 10) I find the first plates to have appeared within the fasciole; in a specimen of 66™™ a single pore has already appeared, and in the next stage (Pl. XIII. Fig. 13), 7°5™, three pairs of plates have developed between the fasciole and the ocular plates, each with a single pore. In a specimen of g™™ length (Pl. XIII. Fig.14) four pairs of plates have developed; they are already a little widened and deepened, and the pores are double, the petaloid condition thus being reached. In the plates between the transverse and the latero-anal fasciole no pores are seen, but each has a rather large tubercle. In the apical system also important changes take place. In the youngest specimens only two large genital plates are present, viz. the two anterior. ones, the right one with a single madreporic pore. All the ocular plates are developed, though only that of the anterior ambulacrum is quite distinct. It is an important fact that the ocular plates of the posterior paired ambulacra are separated from the first beginning, at first by the anal area and later on by the two anterior genital plates; the apical system thus is ethmolytic from the beginning, not passing through an ethmophract stage, as might perhaps be expected from a phylogenetic point of view. — The same is shown by Lovén (On Pour- talesia. Pl. XVII) to be the case in Echinocardium flavescens, whereas the young stages examined by Lovén (and myself) of Spatangus purpureus and Brissopsis lyrifera are not young enough for proving the non-existence of an earlier ethmophract stage in these species. — The posterior genital plates cannot be discerned with full certainty, till the specimens have reached a length of ca. 7™™ (Pl. XII Fig. 13). The genital pores appear at a size of g—11™™. The madreporic pores begin to increase in number in specimens of ca. 6", but still at a size of ro—r11™", when the genital pores are already developed, the madreporic plate has not begun to develop into that large size, which it obtains in grown up specimens. The Ingolf-Expedition. IV, 2, 15 II4 ECHINOIDEA. II. On the actinal side the only more important change occurs in the actinostome, the labrum widening at the anterior end until it has taken the place of the posterior half of the actinostome and at last covers the mouth-opening. Other changes occurring on the actinal side are mainly due to simple enlargement of the plates. The identification of these young specimens of Sch. fragilis is beyond doubt, both on account of all intermediate stages being found, and on account of the pedicellarie; it is especially to be noticed that globiferous pedicellariz are developed already in the youngest specimens and of the same form as in the grown specimens, but no other species of Echinoids of the Northern Atlantic, as far as I know, has that type of pedicellarie — except «Hemiaster zonatus», which cannot be taken into con- sideration here, as it has (as far as known) no latero-anal fasciole. Now, on the other hand, these young specimens closely agree with the genus Sfatagodesma A. Ag. (Panamic Deep-Sea Echini. p- 198—202. Pl. 106—7), founded by Professor Agassiz upon some young specimens, about 5” in length. A comparison of the figures given here with those of Spatagodesma Diomede seems to leave no doubt that the latter is only the young of some Schizaster-species from the Southern Atlantic, or perhaps of a species of the genus Adatus, whose development is quite similar to that of Schzzaster fragilis? The pedicellarie might probably have given a definite answer to the question of the genus to which Sfatagodesma Diomede really belongs, but, unfortunately Professor Agassiz does not give any information thereof. Be that as it may; the genus Spatagodesma must certainly be withdrawn as a synonym of one of these genera. Professor Agassiz thinks Spatagodesma most nearly related to Agassizia; this need not be further discussed, in view of the fact that Spatagodesma is really only the young of some other well known genus, whether Schizaster or Abatus ve but, of course, I will not deny that the structure of the young may be of importance for judging of the relation of these genera. In the description of Spatagodesma Professor Agassiz points out that «there is a central apical plate, composed of the four ankylosed genitals»; but the left anterior ocular plate is, nevertheless, not in direct contact with this ankylosed plate, it is separated therefrom «by the intercalation of a row of lateral interambulacral plates». This intercalation of interambulacral plates in the apical system is something quite new in the Amphisternous Spatangoids, and probably Professor Agassiz has been lead to this interpretation by his supposition of a close relation to Agassizia, in which genus all the genital plates are really ankylosed together. A comparison of the figure 2. Pl. 106 (Pan. Deep-Sea Ech.) with the figures given here of the apical system of the young Sch. fragilis seems to me to leave no doubt that the so-called intercalated interambulacral plates are really the two posterior genital plates, the large central apical plate being not the ankylosed genital plates, but the single right anterior genital plate and madreporite. The young stages of Sch. fragilis here described are especially important for the interpretation of the lateral fasciole. Professor Agassiz («Chall».-Kch. p. 200) takes the fact, that the latero-anal fasciole of Schizaster japonicus is sometimes interrupted on the sides of the test, as a proof «evidently showing that the lateral fasciole is an extension of the anal fasciole». The development of the fascioles in 1 It was taken off the Atlantic coast of Patagonia, not off San Francisco, as stated in «Bronn» p. 1406. . 2 The development of Adatus cavernosus will be treated in my Report on the Echinoidea of the Swedish South- Polar Expedition. ECHINOIDEA. II. II5 Sch. fragilis, and even more the quite similar development of the fascioles in Abatus cavernosus, where both lateral and anal fasciole generally disappear with age, shows that the latero-anal fasciole is part, of the primary fasciole. Sch. fragilis was taken by the «Ingolf»-Expedition at the following stations: St. 25 (63° 20' Lat. N. 54° 25! Heng: W. 582 fathoms 3 ah Bol Bottom temp. 5 specimens. ) — 27 (64° 54 55° 10’ 393 3°8 — ) 10 _ — 28 (65°14 — 55° 42’ — 4200 — 3°55 + — ) Numerous specimens. sro SA OATS e's BOUBS see -9:918 6) i VQ =i) 35 7 ie UE ee re RE ORs BOR meee BO me ree: 5 _ =e, Oe =: 1540 —- 69r — 399 = oj, I — — 8r (61° 44" — 27°00 485 — 6% — —) 2 _— — 85 (63°21) — 25°22) — 1700 a —)I a OR AB mi B7 AO ee BIO, me BG ree ee ee re eee tee eee er ag Se | ARO 5S ae ‘5 ee: The species was further taken in the Davis Strait by Wandel 1889 (63° 56’ Lat. N. 53° 12’ Long. W. 130 fathoms. 1 specimen). Several specimens were taken at the Faroe Islands (150—190 fathoms) by the author in 1899 and by Ad. S. Jensen («Michael Sars». 1902). The bathymetrical distribution of this species is ca. 35—700 fathoms. In the «Challenger»- Echinoidea, p. 221 it is stated to have been taken (by the «»). A few words may here be said on Macropneustes spatangotdes A. Ag. The pedicellarize are upon the whole very like those of Spat. purpureus, but some differences may be noticed. The tridentate pedicellarie are quite like those of S. purpureus except the largest forms (Pl. XVI. Figs. 20, 33) which have the outer, widened end of the blade shorter and more spoonshaped; the edge is bent strongly inwards at the lower end of the widened part; the keel of the blade is not distinct. The stalk is very short and thick, the neck quite short. This large form (2™™ head) I have not found in Spaz. purpureus. The second form of tridentate pedicellarie (Pl. XVI. Figs. 3,13) differs from the corresponding form in S. purpureus in having the basal part sharply limited from the blade, the edge forming a distinct angle between the basal part and the blade, whereas in S. purpureus the one continues evenly into the other without a distinct angle. The blade is rather small, though not so small, generally, as in the figured one. Elongated specimens of this kind of pedicellarie (1™™ head) (Pl. XVI. Fig. 30) are found as in Spat. purpureus. The ophicephalous pedicellariz (Pl. XVI. Fig. 4) are rather different from those of purpureus, the blade being shorter and the basal part being more developed than in that species. The triphyllous pedicellarize (Pl. XVI. Fig. 15) are mainly like those of S. purfureus. The spicules are irregular, more or less branched rods. — The pedicellarize mentioned here were taken from the «Chal- ECHINOIDEA. IL. 129 lenger-specimen from Bermudas — in the , 1 think it not too hardy if I venture to say that the American Echinocardium flavescens might also well deserve a renewed careful examina- tion in the light of the characters pointed out for the Echinocardium-species by Koehler and myself. The description and figures in «Revis. of Echini.» do not speak against the identity, but they are not sufficiently detailed for proving definitely that the American form is really Ach. favescens, and in the description there is one point which is not in accordance with the flavescens of our seas, viz. that the ECHINOIDEA. II. 137 colour in the living animal is pinkish. As pointed out already by Diiben & Koren (Op. cit.) the colour of the species in the Scandinavian seas is yellowish. To be sure, Forbes (Op. cit.) states the species to be rose-coloured when alive; but I do not feel convinced that his Amphidetus roseus is really synonymous with Ech. flavescens. Barrois (Catalogue des Crust. Podophthalm. et Echinodermes rec. 4 Concarneau, p. 46) regards 4. rosews as a distinct species, but, as far I can see, the colour is the only real distinguishing character hitherto pointed out, in spite of Barrois’ statement that it is dis- tinguished from flavescens «par sa forme plus allongée et moins élevée; par sa taille moindre» —; the form is too variable to be relied upon alone, and the size is evidently not to be stated to be smaller upon the whole from the single specimen taken by Barrois. — In any case, when the rose-coloured form comes to hand, it ought to be examined closely, also regarding the pedicellariz; till it is thus proved to agree in all essential characters with flavescens I cannot consider A. 7vosews as a mere syno- nym of flavescens. Another thing is that the true favescens is probably also included in the descrip- tion given by Forbes, but in case two species are confounded, the name vosews must, of course, be kept by the rose-coloured species. The specimens from the Cape of Good Hope are certainly not flavescens. I have examined in the British Museum the specimens from the «Challenger» (St. 142) as well as some of the specimens referred by Professor Bell to that species (Echinoidea of South Africa. p.174), and further I have had the great pleasure to receive from Dr. Gilchrist in Capetown three specimens of the same form, (they were, evidently by a mistake, labelled Zchinocardium australe). These specimens are certainly very like the Ach. flavescens as regards their habitus, but a close examination shows them to be a distinct species, which I shall describe here under the name of Echinocardium capense n. sp. The shape of the test (Pl. II. Figs.5, 6, 11) is a little different from that of /flavescens; it is comparatively broader and lower, the apex and the part with the fasciole is especially almost saddle- like depressed. The fasciole is comparatively smaller and more oval (not straight in front) than in favescens (Figs. 22—23). The apical system is like that of flavescens, only the madreporite is perhaps a little more elongate in the Cape species. The spines seem to be a little more slender than in //avesc- ens, and especially it is a prominent feature that no large spines (and tubercles) are found along the posterior side of the anterior petals; only in the largest specimen (26™ length) I find 1—2 larger tubercles at the lower end of these petals; likewise no large tubercles are found in the posterior interambulacrum on the abactinal side. The peristome is somewhat broader but shorter than in flavescens. As in that species the labrum reaches the middle of the second adjoining ambulacral plates; its anterior border is almost straight, very little prominent. — The subanal fasciole has, as in flavescens, distinct anal branches, Two or three pairs of pores are included by the fasciole, whereas only 1—2 pairs are included by it in flavescens. Since both species may thus have 2 pairs of pores included by the subanal fasciole, this character might seem rather useless as a distinctive feature; but it is, really, not so useless. In the Cape specimens with only two pairs of pores included, I find also the following ambulacral plate transversely elongated, reaching to the fasciole; there are thus in this species four transversely elon- gated ambulacral plates on each side of the fasciole, whereas in flavescens there are only three such elongated plates; likewise it is a distinct feature that these plates, which reach within the fasciole, are The Ingolf-Expedition. IV. 2. 4 18 138 ECHINOIDEA. II. considerably narrower than in flavescens. — In the anterior petals the number of pores in the anterior series is larger than in flavescens, viz. 6—7, whereas in flavescens of a corresponding size there are only 2—6, the number varying rather much. As the pore-bearing plates of the petals are rather large, this difference is fairly conspicuous. In the posterior series of the anterior petals and in both series of the posterior petals the number is the same in both species. The odd anterior ambulacrum narrows conspicuously where the fasciole traverses it, which is not the case in flavescens; the number of plates within the fasciole is smaller than in ffavescens, specimens of equal size being compared (7 in capense, ca. 10 in flavescens). The tubefeet and their spicules do not present any distinct differences from /avescens; to be sure, I have not seen any such large spicules, as are found in flavescens below the disk, but they are not always met with in the latter species either, and they may well be found in larger specimens of Fig MBSE RE YC PH rt es | Regan ane’ G Fig. 22. Apical area of Echinocardium capense; the Fig. 23. Apical area of Echinocardium flavescens ; specimen 25™™ in length. 5/r. the specimen 24mm in length. 5/r. capense. — The pedicellarie show partly some differences. The globiferous and ophicephalous pedi- cellarize (the latter rather numerous on the naked actinal part of the bivial ambulacra) are like those of flavescens. The rostrate (Pl. XVII. Figs. 6,16) are more slender, the outer, widened part shorter than in flavescens; but small ones of the same form as those of flavescens (Pl. XVII. Fig. 9) also occur. The tridentate pedicellariz (Pl. XVII. Figs. 5, 35, 39) have the edges of the blade more or less inrolled or even coalesced in the lower part, the outer part being more spoon-shaped widened; in quite small specimens the valves are simply leafshaped (Pl. XVII. Fig. 13). Some of the larger specimens (Pl. XVII. Fig. 39) recall somewhat the larger rostrate pedicellariz. The largest tridentate pedicellarie seen were only o'3™™ (length of head); doubtless larger ones will occur in larger specimens, and probably they will prove to differ yet more from those of flavescens. The triphyllous pedicellariz (Pl. XVI. Fig. 12) differ from those of favescens in being serrate almost all round the edge of the blade, only the point being smooth; the outline of the blade is also more rounded than in that species. a Ne ECHINOIDEA. IL r 139 . The differences pointed out here: in the shape of the test, the form and size of the internal fasciole, the peristome, the petals, the pores included by the subanal fasciole, the tuberculation and the pedicellarize seem to me to leave no doubt that the Cape specimens hitherto referred to Ech. fla- vescens make a well characterized species, certainly nearly related to flavescens, but easily distinguished from this species. The differences in the shape of the test and the form of the peristome, to be sure, do not appear very clearly from the measurements given below of cafemse and some equal-sized specimens of flavescens; these characters also are probably rather variable, but in connection with the other differences they get some value. The difference in the size of the internal fasciole is very clearly seen in these measurements. It will be remarked that the measurements of the fasciole in flavescens are not quite in accordance with those given by Koehler (Kchinocard. de la Méditerr. p. 182); this may be due perhaps to these measurements being taken from the interior borders of the fasciole or to the specimens from the Mediterranean having upon the whole the internal fasciole somewhat smaller than the specimens from the northern seas. Nevertheless the measurements given by Koehler also show the fasciole to be distinctly larger than in capense. Echinocardium capense. Echinocardium flavescens. Fasciole* Peristome* Fasciole* Peristome* Length | Breadth | Height |— - Length | Breadth | Height _ Length | Breadth Length | Breadth Length | Breadth || Length Breadth 26 23°5 14 75 5 2 5°5 27 22°5 17 11'5 8 3 | 4°5 22 19 12°5 7 4 2 5 22 18 13 8°5 55 2 4 19 16 10'5 6 4 2° 3°5 19 15'5 II’5 o-,.4 6 | 2°5 | 3°5 * The fasciole is measured from the outer borders of the fasciole, the length of the peristome is taken from the point of the labrum. All the measurements are in mm. 31. Echinocardium pennatifidum Norman. Pl. Il. Figs. 3, 7, 9, 13, 15, 17. PL XVI. Fig. 18. Pl. XVII. Figs. 1, 18, 20, 2426, 28—29, 32—33, 42, 44. Literature: Barrett: On two species of Echinodermata new to the Fauna of Great Britain. Ann. Nat. Hist. 2.Ser. XIX. 1857. p. 33. Pl. VII. Fig. 2.a—c. («dmphidotus gibbosus» Ag.) — A. M. Nor- man: Last Report on Dredging among the Shetland Islands. Rep. Brit. Assoc. 1868. p. 315. — Hodge: Catalogue of the Echinodermata of Northumberland and Durham. Nat. Hist. Transact. Northumberl. and Durham. IV. 1872. p.142. Pl. V. Figs.1—5. — Agassiz: Revision of Echini. p. 111, 351. Pl. XX. Figs. 1—2(?) — F. Jeffr. Bell: On a species of Echinocardium from the Channel Islands. Ann. Nat. Hist. 5 Ser. XVII. 1886. p.516—17. Catalogue Brit. Echinoderms. p. 170. Pl. XVI. Fig.5. — Hoyle: Revised List Brit. Echinoidea. p. 428. — Koehler: Echinides et Ophiures .... de '«Hirondelle» (229). Monaco. Fasc. XII. 1898. p. 24. Pl. IIL. Fig. 7, IV. Figs.g—11. VIII. Figs. 4o—42. Sur la présence en Méditerranée de l’Asterias rubens et de lEchinocardium pennatifidum Norm. Zool. Anz. XXI. 1898. p- 471—4. Sur les Echinocardium de la Méditerranée (231). Pl. 4. Fig. 15. — Stanley W. Kemp: Echinoderms of Ballynakill and Bofin Harbours, Co. Galway, and of the Deep Water off the West Coast of Ireland. Ann. Rep. Fish. Ireland. 1902—03. Pt. I]. App. VI (1905). p. 199. 18* 140 ECHINOIDEA. IL. Very little has to be added to the careful descriptions of the test of this species given by Bell and, especially, by Koehler. — The labrum is very short, not reaching beyond the middle of the first adjoining ambulacral plates (Pl. II. Fig. 15), a prominent difference from flavescens, in which species | it reaches the second ambulacral plate. (This feature is well seen in Koehler’s Fig. 11. Pl. IV (Op. cit. Monaco) but not mentioned in the text; the division of the plate I.a.1 in two small plates, shown in this figure, is an abnormal case). The subanal fasciole according to Bell (Catalogue. p. 171) «seems to include only one pair of plates, which are triangular in form and have a pair of pores at the outer apex of each triangle». Koehler (Op. cit. Pl. IV. 10) figures two pairs of pores. Both cases may occur, but whether there be one or two pairs of pores included, three ambulacral plates reach within the fasciole, viz. Nr. 6—8; the last of them may reach scarcely beyond the fasciole — in that case ouly one pair of pores is developed within the fasciole, or it may reach farther within — then also the second pair of pores is developed. The periproct has a circle of larger plates all round, not only at the lower edge as in the other species. The tube-feet of the anterior ambulacrum within the fasciole are quite rudimentary, only very few of them or even none at all with a few rosette-plates, — a rather conspicuous difference from flavescens and capense, which have these tubefeet well developed. Accordingly the pores of these am- bulacral plates are very small. The spicules are few and small, irregular rods; often none at all are found in the tube-feet. The very large spicules below the disk, so characteristic of Ech. cordatum, are not found here. The subanal tube-feet with the usual clubshaped rods. The rosette-plates, when pre- sent, like those of favescens. — According to Koehler (Op. cit. Monaco. p. 26) the tubercles within. the internal fasciole «diminuent 4 mésure qu’on se rapproche de la ligne médiane>». I find the inverted case, that they increase in size towards the median line, and the same is seen in Koehler’s PLIV. Fig.9 and especially in the fig. 15 of «Sur les Echinocardium de la Méditerr.», so that there is evidently alapsus calami here. Otherwise these larger tubercles continue along the anterior ambulacrum, beyond the fasciole towards the ambitus and gradually pass.into the larger tubercles of the actinal side. But no larger tubercles are found scattered on the antero-lateral interambulacra on the abactinal side — a very good character by which to distinguish this species from f/avescens. — In two of the specimens before me the test is distinctly unequally developed, the right side projecting in front of the left. (PI. II. Fig. 15, 17). eck The pedicellarize have received some attention, being partly very conspicuous. Thus the large, strongly serrate, tridentate pedicellarie were seen by Norman and have given rise to the name fen- natifidum. Hodge (Op. cit.) figures the valves of three forms of pedicellariz, viz. a large, slender form of tridentate pedicellariz, a short, coarsely dentate (the rostrate) and a small, simply leafshaped form, thought to be the «immature form» of the former. Koehler describes and figures (Pl. VIII. Figs. 40 —42) three forms of pedicellariz, viz. a large tridentate pedicellaria with strongly serrate edges, a smaller form, equally strongly serrate (rostrate?) and a third form which must certainly be a globiferous pedicellaria. —I have found all these forms and further triphyllous pedicellarize, whereas ophicephalous pedicellariz have not been met with in any of the specimens seen by me. The globiferous pedicellariz (Pl. XVII. Figs. 18,29) are not very copiously represented; only in one of the 8 specimens examined have I found a single one on the abactinal side. In Professor eee ae eee a eS CP eee ae ee TT Me eas ECHINOIDEA. II. I41 Koehler’s specimens they were evidently more numerous. The valves have a very wide basal part; the blade is a short, narrow tube, with a small terminal opening surrounded by some short teeth, 5—6 on either side; the point is straightly cut. The difference between the globiferous pedicellariz of this species and flavescens is very conspicuous. The rostrate pedicellariz (Pl. XVII. Figs. 20, 28, 32,44) are very richly developed. The simpler forms are very like those of Spa/angus, recalling somewhat, as pointed out by Koehler, the ophice- phalous type of the Echinide, with which they have, however, nothing to do. The blade is in these forms simply rounded, the narrowed part being very short, with quite smooth edges (Pl. XVII. Figs. 32, 44); the edge of the widened part is finely serrate. Other specimens have a larger narrowed part, the edge generally being provided with one or more very large teeth (Pl. XVII. Figs. 20, 28). The larger of these forms are like the tridentate pedicellariz, only shorter — indeed, it is impossible in this case to draw a definite distinction between rostrate and tridentate pedicellariz. The larger ones of these pedicellarie are ca. 1™™ (length of head); they have a well developed neck, and the stalk, as usual in Echinocardium, consists of long, very loosely connected fibres. They occur both on the actinal and abactinal side. — Also small specimens are found, which are more like the usual type of rostrate pedicellarize. The tridentate pedicellarize occur in two very distinct forms, viz. a large form (up to 2°5™™ length of head) with strongly serrate edges (Pl. XVII. Figs. 1, 33), and a more slender form with narrow, leaf- shaped valves, joining in most of their length; in the part where the valves join, the edges are very finely serrate, in the lower part the serrations are coarser (Pl. XVII. Figs. 25, 26, 42); in some specimens the valves are more slender and the serrations of the lower part larger (Pl. XVII. Fig. 24); this form evidently corresponds to the Pl. VIII. 4o of Koehler. Otherwise all transitional forms are found be- tween these two forms. The basal part is very narrow. Fourvalved specimens occur. This form, which has already been figured by Hodge (Op. cit.) does not reach the size of the first form, it scarcely exceeds 1°5™™ length of head. — The triphyllous pedicellariz (Pl. XVI. Fig. 18) are rather elongate, with the whole edge, except the very point, finely serrate; the serrations increase a little towards the point of the blade. On the younger stages of this species I cannot give much information, having seen besides larger specimens only a specimen of 9™™ length and one of 18™™ length. In the latter the genital pores have appeared, not in the former. The petals are distinct already in the specimen of 9™™, viz. 4 double pores in the anterior, 10 in the posterior series of the anterior petals, 9 in both series of the posterior petals. In the specimen of 18™™ the anterior series in the anterior petals is less developed, having only one or two small double pores. This species is known from the British Seas, from the Feeroe Islands to the Bay of Biscay. From the Danish Seas it was hitherto unknown, but recently Dr. A. C. Johansen has taken a specimen (the above mentioned small one of 9™™) in 35 M. off Thyborén («Thor». IV. 1905). Evidently the species is rare in our seas, otherwise it would scarcely have been overlooked. — By the «Ingolf» it was not taken, but I have myself dredged some specimens at the Faroe Islands in ca. 80—r150 fathoms. (16 Miles W. of Nols6é, and 13 Miles W. of «Munken>, a small rock at the South end of 142 - ECHINOIDEA. II. Suderé). The bathymetrical distribution of the species is, as far as hitherto known, from shallow water to ca. 150 fathoms. Ech. pennatifidum is further stated to occur in the Mediterranean and at the American Coasts of the Atlantic (Florida and West-Indies). The presence of the species in the Mediterranean at Tamaris- sur-Mer! was announced by Professor Koehler, who has done me the very great service to send me one of these specimens. A close examination thereof, however, shows that this specimen differs in several respects considerably from sennatifidum. — The labrum reaches to the second adjoining ambu- lacral plates as in flavescens, whereas in pennatifidum it ends off the middle, or (in the largest speci- men examined) even at the anterior end of the first ambulacral plate. Four ambulacral plates reach within the subanal fasciole, which accordingly includes three pairs of pores; in pennatifidum three plates reach within the fasciole, with two or only one pair of pores. The periproct is like that of flavescens, very different from that of pexnatifidum. The anal opening is rather eccentric, lying near the upper edge, surrounded by small, irregular plates. The lower part of the anal area is bordered by a series of large, regular plates, which diminish in size towards the upper edge; they are closely covered by a fine granulation. The anal fasciole is in direct connection with the subanal fasciole, whereas in fennatifidum it is separated from the latter by a rather broad band of coarser tubercles, as is well seen in Koehler’s Fig. 10. Pl. IV (Monaco); in young specimens this is, however, not the case, the granulation of the two fascioles uniting in the median line. The number of pores in the petals differs considerably from what is, found in pennatifidwm of a corresponding size. I’ give here the measurements of the test and the number of pores in the petals . of this specimen, and, for comparison, of specimens of pennatifidum and flavescens of a correspon- ding size. Number of pores Length | Breadth | Height Anterior petals Posterior petals Anterior Posterior Anterior Posterior series series series series Specimen from Tamaris.. | 50mm 45mm 32mm 9 13—I4 10 g—I0 Ech. pennatifidum........ 52— 52— 3I— - 4 I2—I5 I3—14 | 13—14 Ech, flAvescens. 0... ceess 55— -| 49—« |] 32— 9 13—I4 || IOo—II IOo—I2 The internal fasciole seems to be larger than in fennatifidum (— unfortunately the anterior part of the test is damaged, so that I cannot state that exactly —); in any case it is more remote posteriorly from the apical system than in the specimen of 52™™ length, of which the above measure- ments are given — in the latter the fasciole passes over the second plate in the posterior interambu- lacrum, in the Mediterranean specimen it passes over the 4th—sth plate of the posterior interambula- crum. The greatest width of the fasciole is 1o™™ in the said specimen of pennatifidum, 13™™ in the Mediterranean specimen; it is further to be remarked that one or two large tubefeet of the posterior series of the anterior petals are within the fasciole, which is not the case in either pennatifidum or 1 Sur la présence, en Méditerranée, de l’Asteras rubens Linné et de l'Echinocardium pennatifidum Norman. Zool. Anzeiger. XXI. Nr. 567. 1898. ECHINOIDEA. IL 143 flavescens. —'The tubefeet of the odd anterior ambulacrum seem to be very well developed. The pedi- cellarize differ very essentially from those of pennatifidum; they are, indeed, quite like those of /lave- scens, only the rostrate pedicellariz are a little more slender than in that species (Pl. XVII. Figs. 36, 46), and I find here the form of tridentate pedicellarie figured by Koehler (Sur les Echinocard. de la Méditerr. Pl. 4.13) as characteristic of flavescens, a form which I have, otherwise, not found in that species (Pl. XVII. Fig. 14, comp. above p. 135). Ophicephalous pedicellariz were not found. — The spicules do not present peculiar features; I do not find any large spicules just below the disk. From what is here pointed out I think it is proved beyond doubt that this specimen is not pennatifidum, and the presence of that species in the Mediterranean thus remains problematic, no other instances of its occurring there being recorded, as far as I know. From the Zoological Station at Naples I have received under the name of Ech. mediterraneum two (smaller) specimens, which evidently belong to the same species as the above described specimen from Tamaris. In one of them the labrum does not reach beyond the first adjoining ambulacral plates, in both of them only two pairs of pores are enclosed by the subanal fasciole. Otherwise they agree with the specimen from Tamaris. In the larger of them (34™™ in length) one large tubefoot of the anterior petals (posterior series) is developed within the fasciole, in the smaller specimen (32™™ in length) no such larger tubefeet are as yet developed within the internal fasciole. — There is a faint violet tint seen on the abactinal spines. After all I think it must be admitted that this form must be regarded as a separate species, which I propose to name Echinocardium intermedium n. sp.' It is nearly related to Lch. flavescens, and, especially, Ech. capense, whereas it is not more nearly related to Ach. pennatifidum or mediterraneum, to which two species the specimens known to me have wrongly been referred. It differs from /avescens mainly in having no larger tubercles on the lateral and posterior interambulacra on the abactinal side, and those of the anterior interambulacra are much smaller than in /lavescens. Further the rostrate and large tridentate pedicellarize differ not inconsiderably from those of /favescens. For the larger specimens it may perhaps prove a constant feature that the large tubefeet of the anterior petals, posterior series, continue within the fasciole, which is not the case even in the largest specimens of Jiavescens. Tf other constant characters are to be found distinguishing it from flavescens cannot be stated from the present scarce material. From ch. capense it is distinguished mainly by its much larger internal fasciole, and the shape of the test which is much more like flavescens, without the almost saddlelike depression of the apex, so characteristic of capense. Regarding the pedicellarize it is to be remarked that their triphyllous pedicellarie differ rather considerably, being as in /flavescens in the Mediterranean species, with only a few serrations at the lower end of the edge of the blade, whereas in capense they are serrate almost along the whole edge of the blade. Ophicephaious pedicellariz are known only from capense, while globiferous and large tridentate pedicellarize are not known from this latter species. A comparison of the number of pores in the petals cannot be made, as only small specimens of cafense have been examined, and only larger specimens of zztermedium. t Possibly it will prove identical with the 4. rosews Forbes; in that case this name will, of course, have to be re- tained and the name cztermedium will be dropped as a synonym thereof. For the present it is, however, necessary to give the species a new name, since it is still uncertain which species is really the 4. voseus Forbes. 144 ECHINOIDEA. II. To this species evidently belongs the specimen figured by Koehler (Sur les Echinocardium de la Méditerranée. Pl. 4. 10) as well as that figured by Gasco (Op. cit.), and it may perhaps be allowed to suggest that in several other instances the two species flavescens and intermedium have been con- founded. The existence of flavescens in the Mediterranean is proved by Figs. 4 and 5 of the paper quoted by Koehler which are certainly true Wavescens and have been made after specimens from the Mediterranean, as expressly stated by Professor Koehler in a letter to me. The American specimens referred to Ech. pennatifidum will probably be found not to belong to that species either. From the description in the «Rev. of Echini» p.351 it appears that the Ameri- can form differs from penxnatifidum in several regards. The periproct’ is said to be somewhat pear- shaped; in pennatifidum it is more or less transversely elongate. The internal fasciole is «very elong- ated, elliptical, including an extremely narrow space»; in Jennatifidwm it is more angular, as is very well seen in Koehler’s Fig.9. Pl. IV. (Monaco). The apex is «anterior, and placed at a distance of about one fourth the longitudinal diameter of the test from the anterior extremity, thus differing strikingly from either E. flavescens or E. cordatum, in which the junction of the ambulacra is either almost central or eccentric posteriorly»; in Aennatifidum the apical system is, however, not anterior but central or even a little eccentric posteriorly. «The posterior ambulacra are much shorter than in E. flavescens». To illustrate this feature I give here some measurements; they show clearly that the posterior petals (which is evidently the meaning) are ‘distinctly longer in pennatifidum than in flavesc- ens, the reverse case to what is found is Agassiz’ specimens. ; Ech, pennatifidum. Ech. flavescens. Posterior petals Posterior petals Length of . Length of P test Length | yomper test Leng | meer, 52mm 20 mm | 13—I5 55mm i8mm Io—I2 30 — Io — | II—I2 30 — Sas 7-8 18 — 55— | Io—12 I9 — 5— 6—7 Also the form of the test seems to be different, judging from the figures given in the «Re- vision» (Pl. XX.1), the posterior end being more pointed in the American form, whereas in the Euro- pean form it is rounded. Unfortunately nothing is known of the labrum, the number of ambulacral plates reaching within the subanal fasciole, the number of pores in the petals, the pedicellarie and spicules. But the differences pointed out here seem scarcely to leave any doubt that the American specimens referred by Agassiz to Ech. pennatifidum are really a distinct species; if that proves to be so, this species must keep the name Ech. levigaster A. Ag., by which it was first described (unless it turns out to be identical with the pliocene Zch. orthonotus Conrad). In any case it cannot be re- garded as an established fact that Ech. pennatifidum occurs in the American waters, before it has been stated by a renewed careful examination that the American specimens really belong to this species. « Strictly speaking it is said of the anal opening, but I suppose I am not mistaken in taking it to mean the whole anal area. ECHINOIDEA. II. 145 32. Echinocardium cordatum (Penn.). Pl. XVI. Fig. 21. Pl. XVII. Figs. 15, 21—23, 30, 34, 37—38, 43, 48—49. Principal Synonyms: Spatangus arcuarius Lak. Lchinocardium Sebe Gray. Amphidetus cordatus Forbes, ete. ae Kirtzet Gir. Principal literature: Pennant: British Zoology. 1777. IV. p. 69. Pl. XXXIV. Fig. 75. — Leske: Additamenta ad Kleinii Nat. Disp. Echinod. p. 230. Tab. XXIV. c.d.e. Tab. XXXVIIIL 5. — Abildgaard: Zoologia Danica. III. p. 17. Tab. XCI. («Spat. flavescens» — non Mill.) — Lamarck: Animaux sans vertébres. 1816. III. p. 32. — Forbes: British Starfishes. p.190. — Diiben & Koren: Skandin. Echi- nodermer. p. 285. — Agassiz & Desor: Catalogue raisonné. p. 117. Pl. XVI.8. — Gray: Catalogue of recent Echinida. p. 43. — Joh. Miller: Bau d. Echinodermen. p. 29. Taf. III. Fig. 3—5. — Desor: Synopsis des Echinides fossiles. p. 407. Pl. XLIII. Fig. 4—5. — Sars: Norges Ech. p.97. — Agassiz: Revision of Echini. p. rog, 349. Pl. XIX. 1o—17, XX. 5—7, XXV. 27—28. — Lovén: Etudes s. 1. Echi- noidées. Pl. I. 2—7, III. 38, XII. 107, XXXIX. 222—226. On Pourtalesia. Pl. VIII. 57—58, XI. 120—126, XII. 148. — Koehler: Rech. s. les Echinides d. cdtes de Provence. p. 130.—(230) p. 473. — Bell: Cat. Brit. Echinoderms. p. 169. Pl. XVI. 1-4. — Hoyle: Revised List Brit. Echinoidea. p. 427. — Grieg: Nordlige Norges Echinodermer. p. 33. — Dédderlein: Arktische Seeigel. Fauna arctica. IV. p. 384. — Stanley W. Kemp: Echinoderms of Ballynakill .... Ann. Rep. Fish. Ireland. 1902—3. Pt. II. App. VI. (1905) p. 182. For other literary references I may refer to the «Revision of Echini» and to Professor Bell’s Catalogue. This species has been so often described and is so well known that I find very little to re- mark except on the pedicellariz and the postlarval development. — Regarding structural features of the test it may be noticed that the labrum reaches the second adjoining ambulacral plates, viz. a narrow forward prolongation of the latter. Three or four ambulacral plates reach within the subanal fasciole, two or three pairs of pores being included (— in the specimens from the Danish Seas there are, almost without any exception, only two pairs of pores included —). The periproct varies greatly in shape (Figs. 24.@—c); generally it is transverse-oval, but it may also be found more or less elongate, sometimes (in specimens from Roscoff) even very elongate and narrow, like that of Ech. mediterra- neum. It may also be pointed out that in the anterior interambulacra there are several larger tubercles scattered on the 2—3 vertical plates just beyond the ambitus; also in the lateral interambulacra there are a few larger tubercles on a pair of the plates just above the ambitus, but only in the anterior series, at the edge of the ambulacrum. This feature, which is distinct already in specimens of ca. 15™™ length, is one more good distinguishing character from mediterraneum, in which species such larger tubercles are not found beyond the ambitus. The spicules, especially those very peculiar large ones below the disk of the tube-feet have been carefully described and figured by Lovén; I have nothing to add. — The pedicellariz, on the other hand, need a more close examination, a tridentate pedicellaria alone having been figured by The Ingolf-Expedition, IV. 2. ° 19 146 ECHINOIDEA. II. Agassiz (Rev. of Ech. Pl. XXV. 27—28). Globiferous, rostrate, tridentate and triphyllous pedicellariz have been found; ophicephalous ones do not seem to occur. : The globiferous pedicellariz (Pl. XVII. Figs. 37, 49) are very conspicuous, with a thick, brownish head; the valves are very short, with a very large basal part and a short, tubeshaped blade, which has 5—6 teeth along each side of the elongate terminal opening and often an outer median one. The stalk has a whorl of free projecting rods at its lower end; the upper end is attenuated. These pedi- cellarize I have found only on the actinal side, and only in specimens from the Mediterranean, never in any specimen from the northern seas. In some specimens from Tamaris (Var), which Professor Koehler has most kindly lent me for examination I find them thus represented: in one specimen (the largest) they are very numerous and well developed; in four specimens there are very few of them, at the mouth or on the anal area, and they are small, the basal part being not very large and the whorl on the stalk little developed; in two specimens I find no globiferous pedicellariz at all — Fig. 24, a—c. Anal and subanal region of Echinocardium cordatum: a speci- men from Skagerrak; 6 from Roscoff; ¢ from Naples. in these latter specimens, on the other hand, the tridentate pedicellarize seem comparatively more richly developed than usually. The rostrate pedicellarie (Pl. XVII. Figs. 15, 21, 38) are rather like those of flavescens, only still more like tridentate pedicellariz; the blade generally is somewhat pointed, and may havé a pro- minent tooth in the point. In some specimens from the. Mediterranean I find such with the blade much narrower (Pl. XVII. Fig. 34), recalling very much those of Spatangus. — The tridentate pedi- cellarize (Pl. XVII. Figs. 22, 23, 30, 43, 48) have leafshaped valves, in the smaller ones joining with their whole edge; in the larger forms the blade is more or less narrowed in the lower part, the edge being irregularly serrate; there is generally some meshwork in the bottom of the blade in these larger pedi- cellariz. In the specimens from Tamaris I ‘find the tridentate pedicellariz unusually broad (Pl. XVII’ Fig. 30). The largest ones seen were ca. 15", length of head. — The triphyllous pedicellariz (Pl. XVI. Fig. 21) are very peculiar; in the outer part there is a series of broad teeth inside along the edge; the serrations pass a little way up together with these teeth. In about the outer half of the blade the edge is smooth. — Ophicephalous pedicellarize unknown. This species, which was not taken by the « 2 (australe), The furrow ending abruptly at the anterior end of the internal fasciole; the pores within this fasciole distant and in single series. No larger tubercles - abovecthe aimbittis els | seers S55. Sale ee eaten coment aay els ea een 1. mediterraneum. 3. No larger primary tubercles in the interambulacra above the ambitus; the labrum very short, not reaching beyond the middle of the first adjoining SIBOAINCTAL MISTER. Sie sa ewe. ys bib ews sve reas RR eee ee pennatifidum. Larger primary tubercles are found at least in the anterior interambulacra above the ambitus; the labrum generally reaching the second adjoining amibulacral plates: 205 cad eel eS S eS, cas fa ati nana pate a el 4. 4. Very prominent primary tubercles in all the interambulacra above the am- | SCT eet and — — — : - elongata and T. pacificus. Globiferous pedicellariz with the valves ending in two long hooks: Br. lyrifera and luzonica. _ — several short teeth surrounding the terminal opening: &r. alta. — -- of two kinds, one with long and slender valves, ending in two long hooks, the other with short valves with several teeth round the terminal opening: Lr. atlantica, columbaris (2 only the slender form known), e/on- gata (? only the slender form known). _ _ unknown: TZ. pacificus, Br. Oldhami and n. sp. From this summary it is evident that none of the characters give the same grouping of the species; there is such a mingling of all the characters that it seems quite hopeless to distinguish different genera among them. If different genera be maintained, they can only be characterised by one of the characters named above. In that case it would perhaps be the most natural thing to take the confluent ambulacra as the distinguishing character; but then the name A7eimza Gray would have the priority and would have to be revived instead of Zoxodrissus — the more so as the name Zoxo- brissus can in no case become more than a synonym of Srzssopsis, as Lambert informs me in a letter. I, for my part, find it preferable to keep all the recent species in one genus, Brissopsts, instead of dividing them in a rather artificial way into two (or more) genera. 1 The species mentioned above p. 163. The Brissopsis circosemita described by Agassiz and Clark in their recently published «Preliminary Report on the Echini collected, in 1902, among the Hawaiian Islands» (Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 1. 1907. p. 257) has confluent petals like those of /wzonica and only three ambulacral plates included by the subanal. fasciole. The numero of the first plate reaching within the fasciole is unknown. The labrum is only stated to be nearly straight; the pedicellarie are unknown. ~ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA. Porocidaris purpurata W. Th. Several specimens were taken by the «Thor» at 62°57’ Lat. N. 19° 58’ Long. W. 957 M. (off South Iceland) in 1903 and at 49° 25' Lat. N. 12° 20’ Long. W. 1270—1180 M. (off Southwest Ireland) in 1905. — The Porocidaris elegans mentioned by Koehler in «Echinodermes .... du Caudan» (226. p. 89) is, as Professor Koehler kindly informs me, P. purpurata. In Part I. p. 173 I have established a var. Zalismani of this species, characterised by the upper primary radioles having the neck swollen in a fusiform manner and of a fine violet colour. The specimens taken by the «Ingolf» have not the neck of the spines thus swollen, so that the specimens from the «Talisman», which show that feature exceedingly developed must necessarily appear to me at least a distinct variety. The additional material from the «Thor», however, shows that this variety cannot be upheld. Among these specimens all transitions may be found from such specimens with the neck of the spines not at all swollen to such with the neck of most of the upper spines consider- ably swollen, and this swollen part of the spines is of a beautiful violet colour, which sometimes continues almost to the point of the spines. The specimens upon which the var. Zalsmani was established thus cannot be regarded as more than extraordinary beautiful specimens of P. purpurata. — For the rest the swelling of the spines has been sufficiently represented by Wyv. Thomson («Poreupine»-Echinoidea. Pl. LXI. Figs. 1, 4,6) though he does not mention this peculiar feature in the text. — It may be remarked that the neck is much longer in the upper spines than in those at the ambitus and on the actinal side. Tretocidaris annulata Mrtsn. The examination of some specimens of 77. Bartletti (A. Ag.) in the U. S. National Museum has convinced me that 77. annulata is only a synonym of the latter species. The description of this species given in the «Blake»-Echinoidea is so very insufficient that it is scarcely possible to recognise the species thereby, and even the Fig. 16. Pl. II of the «Blake»-Ech. gives a quite wrong representation of the ambulacra. In the description («Blake»-Echinoidea. p. ro) it is said: «the poriferous zone is somewhat flexuous, the furrows more distant, and the median ambu- lacral granulation finer, than in the other West India species of the genus», and the figure shows the ambulacra closely covered by tubercles, three on each plate, without any naked space in the middle. But the ambulacra of this species are really as I have described for 77. annulata (Part I. p. 17), each plate bearing only one small tubercle at the lower edge, inside of the primary tubercle, leaving a broad naked space along the median line. Only in the largest specimen (68™™) is there in some of the median ambulacral plates a third small tubercle inside the second tubercle, but still the naked The Ingolf-Expedition. IV. 2. 22 170 ECHINOIDEA. II. median space is very conspicuous. Also the interambulacra are represented in this figure as having no naked median line, whereas 77. Bartletti really has a conspicuous naked median line in the inter- ambulacra. — A specimen from the «Blake» St. 272, examined in the Museum of Yale College, also agrees with the specimens in the U. S. National Museum, not with the said figure Pl. II. 16. It thus seems that the said figure has been made from another species, the figure being otherwise evidently very carefully drawn. In case the figure really represents 77. Bartletti correctly 77. annulata must be retained as a distinct species, to which the specimens seen by me in the U. S. National Museum and the Museum of Yale College would have to be referred. To the description of the species may be added, besides the peculiar feature already pointed out in the description of 77. amnulata that the radioles are spinous almost exclusively along their upper side, that the actinal radioles are almost smooth, slightly flattened, but mot serrate along the edge, and not widened towards the point. The primary ambulacral spines are narrow and pointed, only about half as large as the spines round the radioles, not nearly of the same size as the latter, as is stated in the description in the «Blake»-Echinoidea. The inner ambulacral spines have a distinct «ampulla» on the upper edge. The differences in the globiferous pedicellariz of Bartletti and annulata shown in Part I. Pl. X. Figs. 22, 31 and Figs. 23, 30 are certainly not sufficient for maintaining two species, the more so as this species has been shown by Agassiz and Clark in the recently published work on the Czdaride* to vary considerably in regard to the pedicellariz. — As regards the genus Tretocidaris which is rejected in this latter work ‘I cannot take up the discussion here, but I hope to have occasion soon to rediscuss the matter. _ Hygrosoma Peters (A. Ag.). Several specimens were taken by the «Thor» in 1906 at 49° 20’ Lat. N. 12° 39’ Long. W. 1520 M. To this species must also be referred the specimens from the Bay of Biscay mentioned by Koehler (Echinod. du «Caudan». p. 92) under the name of Phormosoma luculen- tum, as Professor Koehler informs me in a letter. Sperosoma Grimaldi Koehler. In Part I (p.77. PI IV. Figs. 4,5) was described and figured a young specimen of this species, 27™" in diameter. The figures (which were not drawn by myself) are, however, too little detailed and do not show the structure of the test exactly. As it will be of considerable interest to get some knowledge of the development of this very interesting genus, I give here some detailed figures of parts of the test of the specimen mentioned. It would, of course, have been desirable to have some younger stages, but such have not yet been found, and the present speci- men is still young enough to be of value for the study of the development of this form. The ambulacra on the actinal side already show the structure typical of the genus, the larger primary plate of each set being divided into an outer, smaller, pore-bearing plate and an inner, larger one without pore; this is the case also with those nearest the actinostome. As is well known the inner ambulacral plates with the growth of the specimen pass on to the buccal membrane and there develop into very broad, but short plates, which cover the whole buccal membrane. In the small specimen 4 such plates, besides the inner one, the true buccal plate, are counted in each series; in a 1 A. Agassiz and H. Lyman Clark: Hawaiian and other Pacific Echini. The Cidaride. Mem. Mus. Comp. Zool. XXXIV. 1. 1907. — This work was not received before most of. the present work was printed, so that I was unable to take it into consideration in my introductory remarks. ECHINOIDEA. II. I71I larger specimen (130) I count 7—8 such plates in each series, all being provided with a pore. Of the inner plate without poré no trace is seen, and since there is otherwise such a plate for each three pore-bearing plates, this fact must mean that the poreless plate becomes absorbed on passing to the buccal membrane. On the abactinal side it is seen that the larger primary plate is from the beginning undivided; but already from the third or fourth the dividing line has appeared, though not easily discernible before nearer to the ambitus. All the pores are distinct, only that of the inner small plate distinctly the larger, corresponding to the larger size of the tubefoot of this plate. Fig. 27. Part of the actinal and abactinal side of the test of Sperosoma Grimaldi; 27™™. The genital and ocular plates are already separated by small anal plates, except the ocular plate III which is still in contact with the adjoining genital plates. In younger stages the apical plates will undoubtedly form a closed ring. The genital pores have not yet appeared; in a specimen of 4o™™ diameter from the Fzeroe Channel they have appeared, but the genital organs are still very small. The ocular plates are rather large, with a peculiar radiating striation in the outer part. The anal area is closely covered by numerous small plates, those at the outer edge being somewhat larger; the inner ones are narrow and elongated, radially arranged round the anal opening. — The gills have not yet appeared in this specimen, but in the specimen of 4o™™ they are present, though still very small. . This species was taken by the «Thor» at 62°57’ Lat. N. 19° 58’ Long. W. 957 M. in 1903 and at 61° 15' Lat. N. 9° 35’ Long. W. goo M. in 1904. 22* 172 ECHINOIDEA. II. Phormosoma placenta W.Th. In the «Echinoidea d. deutschen Tiefsee-Expedition» (p. 126—28) Déderlein points out that the specimens of Phormosoma placenta from the Davis Strait as well as that figured in the «Blake»-Echinoidea differ from the specimens from the European side of the Atlantic, in having fewer abactinal plates in the ambulacra and interambulacra; in the European form, the typical placenta, there are 10—11 interambulacral and 14—16 ambulacral plates in each series, in the specimens from the Davis Strait there are only 7—8 interambulacral and 9—10 ambulacral plates. The latter form is thus maintained as a distinct species, PA. sigsbez A. Ag., though it is suggested that on examination of a richer material it will, together with the «species» from the Indian Ocean: PA. adenicum, indicum and bursarium, prove to be only a variety of PA. placenta. This suggestion is no doubt correct, as regards Ph. sigsbei at least. Several specimens before me from the Faroe Channel («Michael Sars» 1902) as well as some from the «Thor» are quite intermediate as regards the number of abactinal plates, so that it is impossible to decide thereby to which form they should be referred. I give here some instances. The tridentate pedicellariz in these niainaten Seah waar i es specimens, however, are of the slender form, the character derived Somm 8 12 from the form of these pedicellariz, viz. narrow in the typical A/a- es : ict centa, broad in sigsbed (comp. Pl. XII. Figs. 2—3 and 7 of the Part I) 88 — 8—g 13 thus apparently being more constant. To distinguish Ph. Sigsbet aa Ss ay as a separate species from placenta seems then scarcely justified, but it may be correct to maintain it as a variety besides the typical form of Ph. placenta, the latter belonging to the European side of the Atlantic, the var. szgsbez to the . American side, from the Davis Strait to the West Indies. Mr. R. T. Jackson has called my attention to the fact that in the figure of a young Phormo- soma placenta given in the Siam-Echinoidea I. (p. 54) the teeth are represented as situated in the ambulacra. I take the occasion here to correct the error, which I can scarcely account for. The teeth are distinctly interambulacral also in the smallest specimens, as might, of course, be expected. FHypsiechinus coronatus Mrtsn. Mr. R. T. Jackson likewise suggests to me that the plate outside the buccal plates, between the terminal plates, shown in Pl. VII. Fig.6 of Part I ought not to be interpreted as the basal (genital) plate as I have done (p. 89), but as the first interambulacral plate. Mr. Jackson is right in this suggestion. I have examined the specimen figured there and find that the genital plates are also present, and easily discernible, when examining the specimen from the abactinal side, so there is no excuse for the error. Echinus gracilis. In the «Echinoderms of Ballynakill and Bofin Harbours, Co. Galway and of the Deep water off the West Coast of Ireland» by Stanley W. Kemp (Ann. Rep. Fish., Ireland. 1902—3. Pt. II. App. VI. 1905) is named (p. 199) «] | 8? eit a 23 “B56! gi.sl eel | E/E |32| 83 le5|82/52| 2/82) Blea) 2 Perms ee Glatt ak thy 5 Se <3| 2 /<2| 2 /<3| 2 Dorocidaris papilata (Leske) .............. 30—800 +}+yt+ +1/4+)+}/ 4) 444+ )+4+ = | GDYRIOOU Grd ade edie atsls ews 40—270 ee + ary AOL AR TN aoe a eipie:eieiate)slelece 120—450 oe eh MEI CANIS "WED ERE I 52 5 as Sp asian 60 ae! sree. 180—210 om x + aa TI MATRIC PE feeacs tie Cea st es recs 35—225 cad enh ic Se bc 4- ve Cidaris “aifinis Piitiren s. 636 csksceele cess 20~425 2 ha ol Mix pein CREO ea + <== ti htloides AME Rn. xc, ncaa soso e oe 0-250 ae ike al + ae AMOCRTI ATI EMME oo is ee a lew vanes Littoral ce eet eee isc ss ae otherwise Indo: Tretocidaris Bartletti (A. Ag.).............. 25—400 a. + =A EpPINOSA “Mrtetioite yc sees ws. cosas bee Littoral r is : e ® Only St. Helena, Stereocidaris ingolfiana Mrtsn............. 170—635 wa +/+ ee Ts " < < ‘ Also Indian Ocean, off the Porocidaris purpurata W. Th. ............. 485—540 mf +4). +)... Nicobar Islands, Histocidaris Sharreri (A. Ag.).............. 120—355 Brad eee - Si tree * 8 Including Ph. Sigsbei A.Ag. Phormosoma placenta W. Th.® ............ I50—1355 +i +). + |} + | + || Perhaps pe Frise . Calveria‘ hystrix W. Th......... wishing Seu wee 100 — 1000 ae +h. + | + || 4 This name is kept here for Areeosoma fenestratum (W. Th.) ........... 80—375 (+) d + + ) BCUIHE TAS AR a Calica reads s vee ccs 140—400 ee +]... Coelopleurus floridanus A. Ag....... 50—1325 + + | + || Also off South Africa. Salenia goésiana Lov. .............0000e0s 180 Ae + a == MP BPLERGOHI Rae. lds Vasco reiee ce 50—450 |+ 2 BP a a —. Hastiveta AB: Agi cs iis bis conte 100— 1850 5 + + | .. | + ]| also at the Philippines. a+ \WARAPINA BOAR cae amst owes ae be 270—1675 elt ies a +} + Trigonocidaris albida A. Ag. .............. 40—450 ey Cee irtes Wate a be +y..)+ Genocidaris maculata A. Ag............... 25—600 +/+} 4+)+ es +] + Hypsiechinus coronatus Mrtsn,........... 450—800 +) + ? ECHINOIDEA. II. arate |Z | ectiitn |e 8 | gg | Maske | Afican | american region | § region | 2 80 | 2m region Atlantic f Atlantic Range ya gé ee region region Name MOTE | ee) el ew heed seay S|.) Littoral 1 af Conolampas Sigsbei A.Ag................. 75—450 -+ +e Rhyncopygus caribbeearum (Iank.)........ 2—I105 eed ate Nas (+)] -- Urechinus naresianus A.Ag............... 420—1715 +) + + | + || Also off South Africa. Plexechinus hirsutus Mrtsn. .............. 450— 1300 +) + The Ingolf-Expedition. IV, 2 a 25 194 ECHINOIDEA. Il. Arctic 3 Fo che S & § g re Afvican : Poa Range | “®™ |2¢| mein [EP P| rein soe ag Bip ed re ie Seem 3 e ay .8\e8 Pr ee las sa] @lag| 3 I S 9218 a BS | 3 (fathoms) 5 = é : é zs . aise 4 i 43 A 23 2 Calymne relicta W. Th...............+.055 620—2650 + Cystechinus clypeatus A. Ag............+-. 1Q00— 1915 [ic | se sf ee [ome fet dee, feo tamer tees ede Pourtalesia miranda A. Ag. ...........-... 350 Bares Warts eae Wenge Seances hin) ferret toned Bree peg tay oe RS i CRISEAALO WY OEM SEF aoe ois leit ie g'o ote Sees 125—1300 || .. | + Aras its ee NAH GOH MTIBO I oie Cy. dia. chaste ea es Sees 845-1715 + + — (Echinosigra) phiale W.Th.......... 845—1975 + Also off South Africa = = paradoxa Mrtsn....... 845—gI0 Sis i Aéropsis rostrata 3 Rg Sova eee 1240—1750]| -- . zo + Aceste bellidifera W. Th................5. 620—1500 ff <<} [see | is sa| een |ijee | aap see oie | teen | ine eels mete Palzotropus Josephine Lov............... 80250 54 seh ei] pelralasintd so ade gy ots + —= ME ROMBONITANA GS So. cia c's yaelsin ae es 235 Fe So — Hirondellei Koehler ................ 925 + Peripatagus cinctus Koehler.............. 550 k tepid os Homolampas fragilis A. Ag.............-.- 300—1920 5 ape +)/+)+ Palzeopneustes cristatus A. Ag............. 55—450 + + =|) Mysttix ALAS: coca ces eee 20—210 + + Linopneustes longispinus A. Ag............ 40—300 | es + ste Paleobrissus Hilgardi A. Ag............... 80—185 he + A eae ieee Hemiaster expergitus Lov...............-. 220—1700 || ++ | -° (++) ra oo “+ + | +4) +1] 1 Hemiaster Menizi. Agassizia excentrica A. Ag. .............-5 35—390 ae “a + Periaster limicola A. Ag.............--0055 70—140 +- sors +]... Brisaster fragilis (Diib. Kor.).............. 35—700 wehbe |B ca) oe] ea +i +t Schizaster canaliferus (Lmk.) ............ 20—35 ntl ieeant tars ee: eer esabies —— STORDIGMYVANUE, Pe Di :c hie. siorsieye 22 oe 65—1505 |l - 2 me eed ee +) + a Std wariat Kooteet yi). sie 5 Me deci sles Littoral Pee ie res Pra) EEC ne POE 5s Moira AteOpOS LMI) Ses ass ee eitee ees = o—8o0 By) Rises + on Spatangus purpureus O. FM. ............ 5—460 Pe ce oe Oc + + aes TPR CERO LUNAS ole och !a kin sats Space 0.01 100-500 (800)]| - - (4)| + oe T+ + Macropneustes spatangoides A. Ag......... 80—375 APY eres a a Echinocardium flavescens (O. F.M.)....... 5—150 +) +}4+ Gye} + é — intermedium Mrtsn. ................ Littoral Ben aE wots . — pennatifidum Norm................. 5—I50 rs ees (?) St. 302), valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. ¥5/,. — 5. _ Wyvillit, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, from the inside. %5,. 6. — giganteus, — - oa _ — - — (Comp. Fig. 2). ™5/;. 7. Cystechinus clypeatus («Challenger» St. 205), ophicephalous pedicellaria. 37/;. 8. Urechinus naresianus, spicule from tube-foot. 15/;. 9. — _ valve of globiferous pedicellaria, from the inside. 15/,. — 10. Cystechinus clypeatus («Challenger> St. 205), valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 11. Urechinus giganteus, valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. 15/,.' — 12. _— — — - triphyllous — 125/,, — 13. Cystechinus clypeatus («Challenger» St. 334), valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. *5/;. — I4 _ — ( — - 205), — ~- tridentate — 70/, — 15. Urechinus naresianus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria, coarse form. 7°/;. — 16. _ _ — os _ — 70/,, — 17. — Wyvilli, ~ — - — — Ge/,., — 18 — naresianus, — ~- ophicephalous — 125 /,, — 19. os Loveni, — ~- tridentate — «+ 8F/;, — 20. Cystechinus clypeatus («Challenger» St. 334), valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 21. Urechinus naresianus («Challenger> St. 302), valve of coarse tridentate: pedicellaria. 7°/,. — 22. Cystechinus clypeatus («Challenger» St. 205), valve of ophicephalous(?) pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 23 — — ( - - 133) — - Short tridentate — 70/,. — 24. Urechinus Wyvillii, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. %5/,. — 25. — giganteus, — ~- large tridentate — 70. — 26. -- naresianus,— - triphyllous — <. 5); — 27. — giganteus, — ~- small tridentate — 70/,, — 28. Cystechinus clypeatus («Challenger» St. 205), valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 29,

; “| i] r] i ) Sena ma ~ SS SESS et Ron seeeae at Th.Mertenser. dei. Urechinus naresianus A.Ag., giganteus AAg, Wyvillit (A.Aq.), Lovent (A.Ag), Cystechinus elypeatus A.Ag. ORTH UNIVERSIT * OF e LIFORN\ Rs ng ca penis s eS, aN BS abe Bat ek i fs Pe ele) Plate X. 2, 15—I7, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 31, 32; 34, 36-38 Plexechinus hirsutus. 8, 9, 11, 14, 22, 26 Pilematechinus Rathbunt. 1, 4, 7, 13, 24, 28, 29 P. vesica. 5,6, 30 Calymne relicta. 39 Echinocrepis cuneata. 3, 12, 33 Cystocrepis setigera. 10, 18, 20, 35 Spatagocystis Challengeri. Fig. 1. Pilematechinus vesica, tridentate pedicellaria (comp. Fig. 4). 5°/:. — 2. Plexechinus hirsutus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. %5/,. — 3. Cystocrepis setigera, — - ophicephalous — 125 /5. — 4. Pilematechinus vesica, — - tridentate — (comp. Fig. 1). 5°/:. — 5. Calymne relicta, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 6 -- — — - = — 7°), — 7. Pilematechinus vesica, globiferous pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 8 — Rathbunt, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/,, — 9 _ — — - globiferous — side view. ™5/;. — 10. Spatagocystis Challengeri, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;,. — 11. Pilematechinus Rathbuni, — _ ~- globiferous — from the inside. 15/t. — 12. Cystocrepis setigera, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. *5/;. — 13. Pilematechinus vesica,— - tridentate — 5°/,, — 14. _ Rathbuni, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 15/;. — 15, Plexechinus hirsutus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 15/;. — 16. _ — —- - _ _ 195/,, — 17. a — — - triphyllous — 175/,. — 18. Spatagocystis Challengert, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 19. Plexechinus hirsutus, valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. 15/,. — 20. Spatagocystis Challengeri, valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 21. Plexechinus hirsutus, primary spine, side view., (Comp. Fig. 31). 4°/:. — 22. Pilematechinus Rathbuni, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. — 23. Plexechinus hirsutus, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 175/;. — 24. Pilematechinus vesica, — ~- short tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 25. Plexechinus hirsutus, spheeridia. %5/;. — 26. Pilematechinus Rathbuni, valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. %5/,. — 27. Plexechinus hirsutus, spicules, represented in. their relative position in the tube-foot. 175/,. — 28. Pilematechinus vesica, valve of buccal tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 29. aby aie ey ae res fale a re 5°/;, — 30. Calymne relicta, miliary spine. 5°/;. — 31. Plexechinus hirsutus, primary spine, front view. (Comp. Fig. 21). 4°/:. — 32. = = miliary — %5/;. — 33. Cystocrepis setigera, ophicephalous pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 34. Plexechinus hirsutus, globiferous pedicellaria. ° 25/;. — 35, Spatagocystis Challengeri, rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/,. — 36. Plexechinus hirsutus, tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 37. — — filament of actinal tube-foot. *75/;. — 38. — — spine from the actinal plastron. *°/;. — 39. Echinocrepis cuneata, tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. Th. Mortensen, Echinoidea Il. Tab. X. ThMortensen. del. Irth AnsivE A Funke Leipzic. Plexechinus hirsutus Mrtsn., Pilematechinus Rathbuni A.Aq., vesica (A.Agd, Calymne relicta WITh., Echinocrepis cuneata A.Ag., Cystocrepis setigera (AAg.), Spatagocystis Challengert A. Aq. Saris UNIVERSITY OF.” LAL iFORWSS qe at ee el eee . "Sh set rapt an core . ' 2 chad Sale thas ee Plate XI. 4, 7—10, 30 Pourtalesia Jeffreyst. 1, 13, 14, 18—20, 23, 34—37, 40, 41 P. Wandelt. 2, 3, 5, 6, 17, 21, 24, 25, 27—29, 32, 42—44 Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa. 12, 33 P.laguncula, 11 P. Tanneri. 31 P. hispida. 15, 26 P. rosea. 16, 22, 38, 39 om 9Q H DH OP SN ANEYW DN Helgocystis (Pourtalesia) carinata. . Pourtalesia Wandeli, rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, valve of tridentate pedicellaria, from the inside. *5/,. _ — — — - ophicephalous — 125/,. Pourtalesia Jeffreysi, valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria, side view. 15/;. Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. *5/;. — — _ — - ophicephalous — side view. 125/,. Pourtalesia Jeffreyst, valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria, from the inside. *%5/,. a Sa — - tridentate - 173/. -- —_ rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — ~~ valve of rostrate pedicellaria, from the inside. (Comp. Fig. 30). 79/;. — Tannerit, — - = — 79/,. _ laguncula, — ~- ophicephalous pedicellaria. ¥5/,. _ Wandelt, ophicephalous pedicellaria. 7°/,. — — valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria, side view. '5/,. — TOSEQ. — ~- tridentate — 125/,. Flelgocystis (Pourtalesia) carinata, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, side view. (Comp. Fig. 22). 7/1. Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. Pourtalesia Wandeli, valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. 15/,. _ _ —- - rostrate — from the inside. (Comp. Fig. 23.) 7°/;. ~- — primary spine, from the inner part of the buccal cavity. (Comp. Fig. 34). 3°/;. . Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, primary spine, from the inner part of the buccal cavity. 5°/;. . Helgocystis (Pourtalesia) carinata, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, from the inside. (Comp. Fig. 16). 7°/;. f Pourtalesia Wandeli, valve of rostrate pedicellariz, side view. (Comp. Fig. 19.) 7°/;. Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. _ —_ — spheeridia. 15/,. Pourtalesia rosea, ophicephalous pedicellaria. 7°/;. Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, valve of rostrate pedicellaria, from the inside. '5/,. = a as net Rees — side view. 125/,. — — — tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. Pourtalesia Jeffreyst, valve of rostrate pedicellaria, side view. (Comp. Fig. 10). 7°/;. — hispida, — ~- tridentate — 125/,, . Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, ophicephalous pedicellaria. 7°/;. Pourtalesia laguncula, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. _ Wandelt, primary spine, from the invagination, nearer the edge. (Comp. Fig. 20). 3°/;, . Pourtalesia Wandelt, — — from the actinal plastron. 18/,, — _ the point of a primary abactinal spine. 3°/,. : — _ miliary spine, front view. (Comp. Fig. 41). '25/;. . LHelgocystis (Pourtalesia) carinata, miliary spine. 4°/;. — — — valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. Pourtalesia Wandel, tridentate pedicellaria. 15/;. —_ — miliary spine, side view. (Comp. Fig. 37). '5/;. Echinosigra (Pourtalesia) paradoxa, clavula. 7°/;. — _ _ miliary spine. 125/,. a ~ — primary abactinal spine. 35/;. Th. Mortensen, Kehinoidea 1. Tab. X1. eRe: BREED ORS a a a2 Wists Steksrenerea ThMortensen del. Pourtalesia Jelireyst WTh., Wandeli Mrisn, paradoxa Mrtsi., laquneula A.Ag, lanneri A.Aq., eartnata AAg, hispida. AAg, rosea AAg. Ad ee ‘ALIFORN e Ue Plate XII. 4, 6, 9, 18—20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29—31 Echinocyamus pusillus. 1, 3, 5, 8, 10-16, 23, 25, 28 Ech. grandiporus. 2, 7, 17, 24 cs 2. 3: 4. — 5 6. 7, 8. — -23. — 24. — 25. — 26. — 27. — 28. — "20. — 30. — 3I. Ech. macrostomus. Echinocyamus grandiporus, actinal side. %5/;. macrostomus, ophicephalous pedicellaria. 35/;. grandiporus, actinal part of the test, from the inside. 7/;. pusillus, ophicephalous pedicellaria. 37/,. grandiporus, abactinal side. 5/;. pusillus, head of ophicephalous pedicellaria. 375/,. macrostomus, triphyllous pedicellaria. 24°/;. grandiporus, valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria, (the two other valves of the same pedicellaria are represented in Figs. 11 and 12). 35/;. pusillus, endcrown of miliary spine, from above. 3%5/;. grandiporus, — - — ea eee ee _ valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. (Comp. Figs. 8 and 12.) 3%5/;. _ — - _ — ( —. — 8 — IL) 35/;, _ ophicephalous pedicellaria. 325/,, — part of the test, showing the glassy protuberances. among the spine- bearing tubercles. 5°/;. — “ primary spine. 5°/;. — miliary’ — 1%75/;, macrostomus, young specimen, abactinal side. °/;. pusillus, miliary spine. '75/;. — primary — 5%/;, _ valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 3?5/,. erandiporus, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 325/;. pusillus, part of the test, showing the glassy protuberance between the pores of the petals. 5°/;. — valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 3?5/;. macrostomus, actinal side. §/;. grandiporus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 3?5/,. pusillus, part of the actinal side of the test, showing the two large buccal pores : and groups of small pores. 37/;. — actinal side. °/;. grandiporus, tridentate pedicellaria. 175/,. pusillus, actinal part of the test, from the inside. 7/,. — tridentate pedicellaria. 125/,. — abactinal side. %;. . In the figures 1, 5, 17, 24, 16 and 31 the sma}l pores are made somewhat more conspicuous than they are in nature. Th.Mortensen. del, EYP Sarr We eee tt See SRA RRO RR ONO AS LOLS ON ORR RR Meee Th. Mortensen, Echinotdea I. Tah. XU. Echinocyamus pusillus € 0.F Mill), grandiporus n.sp., macrostomus N.sp. UNIVERSITY. 2 aes / rere” a aia Die oe Fig. Plate XIII. — 1. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, 3™". Abactinal side. The number of plates in the paired ambu- s & 16—20. lacra could not be made out ‘with certainty. 15/;. a 2mm, Abactinal side. The number of plates in the paired ambu- Ae lacra not quite certain, likewise the upper plates of the paired interambulacra and the plates of the anal area a little uncertain. 20/,, i ; 2°5™™, Abactinal side. 17/;. a™m, Actinal side. The plates of the three anterior ambulacra are a little uncertain. 2°/,. ; 38™", Abactinal side. The number of plates in the paired am- bulacra not quite certain. 13/5, 4'5™™. Actinal side. 13/;. — Side view. 13/;. — Abactinal side. *3/,. 3™™. Side view. 15/;. a 55™™, Abactinal side. /,. 66™™, Actinal side. 9/;. — Abactinal side. 9/;. TP erie or; Lavi Poe $/,. I poe: \ - gt a 5/ I Abactinal side. 3°5/;. Th. Mortensen, Echinoidea I. Tab. XU. Ingolf Expeditionen V2. 7 PA ee , : 2. LU ZF Z j Z ; Ex SOS Ss Fe aco ss ~< Ne = oo) [isd tae ed pes Leipzig: Lith AnstvEAPunke 1-15. Th.Mortensen del, 16-20. ThBloch fot. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis (Dib. Kor) ; ; a > - % Plate XIV. 3) 7, II, 13—16, 18, 20, 24, 25, 31, 37, 39, 43, 46, 50, 51 Brésaster fragilis. 33, 42, 48 Br. capensis. 9, 19, 22, 26, 34, 40, 41, 45 Schizaster canaliferus. 2, 12, 17, 23, 27, 32, 49 Sch. orbignyanus. 10 Sch. Edwardst. 30, 38 Schizaster n. sp.(?) 6, 9, 28, 35, 44, 47 Fig. SEF ROE SN OS B0 ies Periaster limicola. 4, 5, 21 «P limicola» (Arafura Sea, «Challenger»). «Pertaster limicola» («Challenger», Arafura Sea). Globiferous pedicellaria. 5°/;. Schizaster orbignyanus, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. (Comp. Fig. 32). 37/, Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of small tridentate (? rostrate) pedicellaria. 7°/,. «Pertaster limicola» («Challenger», Arafura Sea), valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 7°/,. — — — — ophicephalous pedicellaria. 7°/,. Periaster limicola, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 7°/;. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of small tridentate (? rostrate) pedicellaria. 7°/,. Schizaster canaliferus, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. (Comp. Fig. 40). 37/;. Pertaster limicola, globiferous pedicellaria. 35/;. 5 Schizaster Edwardst, valve of tridentate (? rostrate) pedicellaria. 7°/,. . Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. Schizaster orbignyanus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. 13a.b. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, spicules of tube-foot. *5/,. 14. 15. 16. 17 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 7 _ _ — valve of globiferous pedicellaria, from the inside. (Comp. Fig. 16). 5°/;. _ ~- — rostrate pedicellaria. 37/,. ; — — valve of globiferous pedicellaria, side view. (Comp. Fig. 14). 70/ Schizaster orbignyanus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. Lrisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. Schizaster canaliferus, . — + small rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, — - — tridentate — 7°/,, «Pertaster limicola> («Challenger», Arafura Sea), valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/,. Schizaster canaliferus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — orbignyanus, — ~- rostrate _ 37/;. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, abnormally ending in two teeth, from the inside. 7°/,. — o — valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. Schizaster canaliferus, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/,. 27a.b. — orbignyanus, spicules from tube-foot. 175/;. 28. 29. 30. at. 32. 33: 34- 35. 36. 7. 38 39: Periaster limicola, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/,. Schizaster orbignyanus, stalk of globiferous pedicellaria. 37/,. — n. sp.(?), valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/,. Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 175/,. Schizaster orbignyanus, terminal opening of the valve of globiferous pedicellaria. (Comp. Fig. 2). 7°/;. Brisaster (Schizaster) capensis, valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. 37/;. Schizaster “asses saben! spicules from tube-foot. 175/,. . Pertaster limicola, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/,. «Pertaster limicola» («Challenger»>, Arafura Sea), valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. 175/;. Brisaster (Schizaster Jragilis, valve of tridentate Nemes 37/,. a-c. Schizgaster n. sp. 3 spicules from tube-foot. 175/4. Lrisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of ophicephalous | idmtasese 175/,. Schizaster canaliferus, terminal opening of valve of globiferous pedicellaria. (Comp. Fig. 8). 7°/:. -— _ valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. . Brisaster (Schizaster) capensis (type specimen), valve of tridentate (? rostrate) pedicellaria. 79/,. — -— Jragilis, rostrate pedicellaria. 37/,. Perwaster limicola, valve of large tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. Schizaster canaliferus, valve of large tridentate pedicellaria. ‘5°/,. . Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. . Pertaster limicola, large tridentate pedicellaria. te . Brisaster (Schizaster) capensis, valve of largé tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. . Schizaster orbignyanus, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/,. . Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis, valve of large tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. zr ES — globiferous pedicellaria. 37/,. Ingolf Expeditionen Ik, 2. Th. Mortensen, Kchinoidea Il Tab. XIV. th. Mortensen del. Lith Antt uF APunke Leipzig Brisaster (Schizaster) fragilis Dib. Kor), capensis (Studer), Schizaster eanaltterus (LamkJ, orbignyanus A.Ag, Ldwardsi Cotteau,n. sp’, Periaster limicola A. Ag. ; POOGRARY fi TP otrHe = & : . ‘UNIVERSITY | OF VAL Vice ; Plate XV. I, 2, 5, 8, 13, I9—21, 29, 37, 40, 43, 52 déropsis rostrata. 6, 12, 27, 34 A. fulva. 10, 14, 15, 22, 25, 32, 36, 39, 41, 51 Aceste bellidifera. 9, 16—18, 24, 26, 30, 31, 35, 38, 44, 45, 47, 48, 50 Hemiaster expergitus. 42, 46 H. gibbosus. 3, 7, 11 «fH». zonatus 4, 33, 49 HZ. tenuis. 23, 28 «HZ» florigerus. Aéropsis rostrata, rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — — valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. sc orange zonatus («Challenger», St. 126), valve of globiferous pedicellaria; side view. (Comp. 19,7), “59/3. : Herein ser es valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. Aéropsis rostrata, frontal tube-foot. wep — /fulva («Challenger», St. 191), valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. «Hemiaster» zonatus («Challenger>, St. 126), valve of globiferous pedicellaria, from the inside. (Comp. Fig. 3). 5°/:. ; Aéropsis rostrata, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. fHlemiaster expergitus, rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 10. Aceste bellidifera, rosette plate, proximal part, in side view. '™°/;. (Comp. Fig. 39). — 11. «Hemiaster» zonatus, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 12. Aéropsis fulva («Challenger», St. 191), valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. 15/;. Fig. Pe WON YrH — 13. — rostrata, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 14. Aceste bellidifera, — - globiferous — 5°/,. —-m — - — - rostrate = 5°/,. — 16. Hemiaster expergitus, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 17. _ — — - small tridentate pedicellaria. 15/;. — 18. — — — - rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 19. Aéropsis rostrata, rosette plate, outer end, from below. 5°/;. — 20. — nas oe — proximal end, from below. 15/;. a i — — valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 22. Aceste bellidifera, — _ - _ _ 5°/,. — 23. «Hemiaster> florigerus (type specimen), valve of tridentate pedicellaria. *5/;. — 24. Hemiaster expergitus («Talisman»), valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 5°/,. — 25. Aceste bellidifera, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. — 26. Hemiaster expergitus, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 15/;. — 27. Aéropsis fulva («Challenger», St. 191), valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 28. «Hemiaster> florigerus (type specimen), spicule from tube-foot. 175/;. — 29. Aéropsis rostrata, valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/,. — 30. Hemiaster expergitus, valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. 125/,. — 31. = age — - ophicephalous — 125/,, -— 32. Aceste bellidifera, — + “rostrate eo 50/1. — 33. Hemuiaster tenuts, — - globiferous . aa 50/,, — 34. Aéropsis fulva («Albatross», St. 3393), valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 45/,. — 35. Hemuaster expergitus, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 175/;. — 36. Aceste bellidifera, valve of small tridentate (? rostrate) pedicellaria. 15/;. — 37. Aéropsis rostrata, — ~- triphyllous pedicellaria. 1™5/,. — 38. Hemiaster expergitus, spicule from tube-foot. 175/,. — 39. Aceste bellidifera, rosette plate, inner part, from below. (Comp. Fig. 10). %°/:. — 40a.b. Aéropsts rostrata, spicules from tales foc: fs, — 41. Aceste bellidifera, spicule from tube-foot. ™°/;. — 42. Hemiaster gibbosus, tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 43. Aéropsts rostrata, miliary spine, with «ampulla». 5°/;. — 44. Hemiaster expergitus, primary spine, from the anterior end of the test, side view. 35/;. — 45. — — small tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 46. — gibbosus, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 5°/;. — 47. —- expergitus, globiferous pedicellaria. 5°/;. : — 48. — — valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 5°/,. — 49. — tenuis, small tridentate pedicellaria; (the skin dark coloured). 5°/;. — 50. — expergitus, primary spine, from the actinal plastron. 35/;. — 51. Aceste bellidifera, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. **5/;. _— 52. Aéropsis rostrata, tridentate pedicellaria. 37/;. Ingolf Expeditionen I. Th.Mortensen, Echinoidea Ik Tab. XV. Secs ee wASAS SS Tose ThMortensen del. . Tish asta EA Punks lene Aeropsis rostrata (WiTh.) fiilva (A. Agy, Aceste bellidifera WiTh., Hemiaster eapergtilis Lov. gibobosus AAq,., zonatus A.Aq., tenuis C 1.Ag.), tlorigerus Studer. ed : ; oye i 4 y 22 & ¢ | cc : ee : Br won . Me Coie o> Zh : : Plate XVI. I, 2, 510, 22, 24, 25, 27, 29, 31, 32, 34 Spalangus purpureus. 17, 23, 28 Spat. Raschi. 11, 19 Spat. altus (? Liitkent). 3) 4, I3—15, 20, 30, 33 Macropueustes spatangotdes. 12 Echinocardium capense. 16 Ech. mediterraneum. 18 Ech. pennatifidum. 21 Ech. cordatum. 26 Ech. flavescens. Fig. 1. Spatangus purpureus, valve of large tridentate pedicellaria, side view. (Comp. Fig. 9). 7°/;. — 2. — ~~ triphyllous pedicellaria. °/,. — 3. Macropneustes spatangoides («Challenger>, St. 33), valve of short tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. — 4 — — - — — - ophicephalous — 70/,, — 5. Spatangus purpureus, ophicephalous pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 6 ne — valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. 175/,. — 7. _ — — - short tridentate —_ 70] 5. — 8 — _ short tridentate pedicellaria. 37/;. — 9 — — valve of large tridentate pedicellaria, from the inside. (Comp. Fig. 1). 7°/;. — 10. Spatangus purpureus, -— - short |. — — side view. “°/;. — Il. _ altus (Liitkent?), valve of short tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 12. Echinocardium capense, — - triphyllous _ 240/,, — 13. Macropneustes spatangoides («Challenger», St. 33), valve of short tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. —4 0 — _ (, St.33), — - —_ triphyllous — 1753/1. — 16. Echinocardium mediterraneum, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 24°/;., — 17. Spatangus Raschi, valve of short tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 18. Echinocardium pennatifidum, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 749/". — 19. Spatangus altus (Liitkent?), valve of short tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 20. Macropneustes spatangoides («Challenger», St. 33), valve of large tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. — 21. Echinocardium cordatum, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 24°/;. — 22. Spatangus purpureus, — - — — 135/,, — 23. -- Raschi, — - tridentate _ 5°/,. — 24. — purpureus, subanal area of a specimen 4™™ in diameter. 15/;. — 25. — —_ valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — 26. Echinocardium flavescens, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 240/,, — 27. Spatangus purpureus, valve of small tridentate pedicellaria. *4°/,. — 28. — Raschi, — - large tridentate _— 79/3. — 29. — purpureus, specimen 4™™ long, actinal side. 15/,. — 30. Macropneustes spatangoides («Challenger», St. 33), tridentate pedicellaria. 35/,. — 31. Spatangus purpureus, specimen 4™™ long, side view. 15/;. — 32. — — subanal area of a specinten 9™™ in diameter. °/;. — 33. Macropneustes spatangoides («Challenger», St. 33), large tridentate pedicéllaria. 3°/;. — 34. Spatangus purpureus, specimen 4™™ long, abactinal side. 15/;. / Ingoll Expeditionen IK, 2. Th. Mortensen, Echinoidea II. Tab. XV7. ThMortensen dei. wthA Spatangus purpurens OF Mill, Raschi. Lov., altus Ltk. Macropneustes spatangoides A.Ag., Echinocardium. . 2 : > - 2 « < ‘ j . i a : : : S . 2 : . os , Simon’s Bay, «Challenger». 4, 11, 22, 27, 29 i 2. ca 4. 5 6. 7. Br. alia. 5, 9, 10, 13, 19, 20, 24 Br. atlantica. 2, 15—17, 21, 28 Br. elongata. Brissopsis lyrifera, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, side view. (Comp. Fig. 25). 5°/:. — elongata, — ~- ophicephalous — 175/3. — lyrifera, var. capensis, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 5°/;. - alta, valve of triphyllous pedicellaria. 175/,. —_ atlantica, globiferous pedicellaria, short form. 37/;. - lyrifera (Mediterranean), valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 7°/;. a «lyrifera» (Simon’s Bay, «Challenger»), valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. (Comp. Figs. 8, 14). 175/;. — «lyriferaa (— = _ _ — - —_ — side view. (Comp. Figs. 7, 14). 175/;. _ atlantica, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, short form. (Comp. Fig. 19). 5°/:. gts Bae — - ophicephalous — 175/;, — alta, — - triphyllous = (Comp. Fig. 4). 175/:. — bbywiferaa — - = oa 75/1. — atlantica (?, young specimen, Gulf Stream), valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. *75/;. ~ «lyrifera» (Simon’s Bay, «Challenger»), valve of ophicephalous pedicellaria. (Comp. | Figs. 7, 8). 175/;. _ elongata, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. (Comp. Fig. 21). 59/1. — _~ spicules from tube-foot. 175/;. _— — _ rosette-plate of frontal tube-foot. 15/;. — lyrifera, spicules from tube-foot. 175/;. — atlantica, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, short form. (Comp. Fig. 9). 5°/:. _— — globiferous pedicellaria, slender form. 4°/;. — elongata, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. (Comp. Fig. 15). 5°/:. — alta, spheeridia. 175/;. _ lyrifera, vat. capensis, upper end of stalk of globiferous pedicellaria. 37/;. — atlantica, valve of globiferous pedicellaria, elongate form. 5°/;. —- lyrifera, — - — — . (Comp. Fig. 1). 5°/;. -= — globiferous pedicellaria. 7°/;. : es alta, — _ 37/,.* — elongata, —_ = 37/;. — alta, valve of globiferous pedicellaria. 7°/;. Echinoidea Il, Tab. XV11. Th. Mortensen, Ingolf Expeditionen N72. Ae Fs ediaal trav elthid 9 Pel el biaid iy his fe ert e ee ESE Funke Leipzig. AP Lith Anstw£. Brissopsis lyrifera (Forb), capensis n.var, alta 1.sp., atlantica n.sp., elongata n.sp. UNIVERSITY ‘OF Cat AB, ee SN aire tai Plate XIX. 3, 6, 10, 15, I8—21, 29, 34 Brissopsis lyrifera. 2, 9 var. capensis. 7, 24, 26, 27 Br. alta. 1, 4, 5, 8,11, 13, 14, 16, 22, 23, 25, 28, 30—33 Br. atlantica. 12,17 Br. elongata. Fig. 1. Brissopsis atlantica, tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. GSP DOS Ot ge es HX He eH HR He OR Oe ARES RH b N Yb DH WY WY DY HK HH OS. IN a AO eT aN 200 I by oN Sears: rN ‘o 30. lyrifera, var. capensis, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/,. — valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 37/;. atlantica, — ~- rostrate _ 5°/;. — — = = _ larger form, side view. 5°/;. lyrifera, small, rostrate pedicellaria. (Comp. Fig. 34). 37/;. alta, valve of = -- 5°/,. atlantica (?), («Talisman») valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/,. lyrifera, var. capensis, valve of small rostrate pedicellaria. *75/;. aes valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. atlantica, tridentate pedicellaria. 37/,. elongata, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. atlantica (?) («Talisman»), valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — (?), valve of 8-valved «tridentate» —_ _7/,, (Comp. Figs. 22, 30). lyrifera (Mediterranean), valve of rostrate pedicellaria, side view. (Comp. Fig. 21). _ atlantica (?) («Talisman»), — ~- small rostrate pedicellaria. 7°/;. elongata, valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 175/;. lyrifera, — - — — 70/,, —_ — - small tridentate pedicellaria. 175/,. — (Mediterranean), valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 37/;. — sa —- - ~ _ (Comp. Fig. 15). 5°/:. atlantica (?), valve of 8-valved «tridentate» pedicellaria. (Comp. Figs. 14, 30). 7°/;. — (?) («Talisman»), valve of rostrate pedicellaria. 5°/,. alia, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/,. atlantica, valve of small rostrate(?) pedicellaria. 7°/;. alta, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 7°/;. — tridentate pedicellaria, fourvalved. 7°/,. atlantica, valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. lyrifera, — - — pi 37/5, . atlantica (?), 8-valved «tridentate» pedicellaria. 5°/,. — (?) («Talisman»), valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/;. — valve of tridentate pedicellaria. 5°/,. Ba eas é pa ms 59/,. lyrifera, rostrate pedicellaria. 37/,. 5°/t, Echinotdea Il. Tah. XIX. Th. Mortensen, oF Sy § Q 43 x 3S S Ral yy y 8 S ee Mortensen del. TR Brissopsis lyrefera. (Forb., capensis n.var, alta n.sp., atlantica .sp., elongata 72. Sp). : ae i ; “s ' a BRARS ' or THE = UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, oie INGOLP-EXPEDITION 1895—1896. THE LOCALITIES, DEPTHS, AND BOTTOMTEMPERATURES OF THE STATIONS. * Depth Depth | Depth ties Lat. N. | Long. W. Min # suues igs Lat. N. | Long. W. Piel ee: fei Lat. N. | Long. W. oe sks fathoms ; fathoms | fathoms I 62° 30° 8° ar’ 132 7°2 24 63° 06° | 56° 00’ 1199 2°4 45 61° 32° 9° 43° 643 4°17 2 63° o4' 9° 22" 262 5°3 25 63° 30° | 54°25 582 ae 46 64932’ 11° 36’ 720 2°40 3 63° 35° |. 10° 24° 272 0°5 63° 51’ | 53°03 136 47 61942" | 13°40 950 3°23 4 O42/O7 ). BET 12: 237 al 26 63°57 | 52° 41’ 34 0°6 Ft oa A: ae A ee Lt 1150 S989, 5 64° 40’ | 12° 09° 155 64° 37° | 54° 24° 109 49 | 62°07 | 15°07’ | 1120 2°91 6 63° 43° | 14°34 go 7°0 27° ‘| 64°54’ | 55° 10° 393 3°8 50 62° 43’ | 15°07’ | 1020 3°13 7 Os? ns" 15° 4 600 4°5 28 65° 14 55° 42" 420 305 51 64° 157 14° 22’ 68 Wie 3 8 63° 56’ | 24° 40’ 136 6°o 29 65° 34° 54° 31’ 68 0°2 52 Shee y ie Bb REE 420 7°87 9 64°18’ | 27° 00’ 295 5°8 30 66° 50° | 54° 28° 22 1°05 53 63° 15° |i ¥5° 07: 795 3°08 10 64° 24’ 28° 50° 788 05 31 66° 35° | 55°54 88 1% 54 63° 08’ 15° 40° 691 3°9 II 64° 34’ | 31° 12’ 1300 1°6 32 66° 35°.) 56° 38’ 318 3°9 55 63° 33° | 15° 02" 316 5°9 12 64° 38° | 32°37’ | 1040 0°3 33 67° 57 | 55°30 35 | 088 56 64° 00° | 15° 09’ 68 7°57 13 64° 47° | 34°33 622 3°0 34 65°17 | 54°17 55 57 63° 37° | 13°02" | 350 3°4 14 64° 45° | 35° 05° 176 4°4 35 65° 16 | 55°05' 362 3°6 58 64° 25° | 12°09’ 211 0°8 15 66° 18’ | 25°59 330 | —0°75 36 61° 50° | 56° 21’ 1435 1°5 59 65° 00° | 11° 16 310 | —o°r 16 65° 43° | 26° 58" 250 6°r 37 60° 17’ | 54° os" 1715 1°4 60 65° 09° | 12° 27’ 124 0°9 17 62° 49’ | 26°55 745 3°4 38 59° 12’ | 51°05’ 1870 1° 3 61 65° 03" 13° 06’ 55 0°4 18 61° 44’ | 30° 29 1135 3°0 39 622 08) 253948) 865 2°9 62 63° 18) 19° 12" 72 7°92 19 60° 29’ | 34° 14’ 1566 2°4 40 62° 00° | 21° 36 845 ara 63 62° 4o’ | 19° 05° 800 4°o 20 58° 20° | 40° 48’ 1695 1°5 41 61° 39° 17° 10 1245 2°o 64 62° 06’ 19° 00’ IO4I acy 21 58° or’ | 44°45 1330 2°4 42 61° 41’ 10° 17’ 625 0°4 65 61° 33° | 19° 00° 1089 3°0 22 58° 10° | 48° 25° 1845 1°4 43 61° 42’ 10° 11’ 645 0°05 66 61° 33" 20° 43° 1128 3°35 23. | 60°43' | 56°00 Pintion Se 44 | 61° 42" | 9°36 | 545 | 4°8 67 | 61°30° | 22°30° | 975 | 3° u | ee” Ve i eS er a oo gy . . tes ; “ s “ . . ” os ‘ : a ae r ae Depth |. | Depth aint Long. W.| Lat. N. ae pig ang Lat. N. | Long. W. Sieh me gee — Lat. N. | Long. w. : fathoms 34 | 92 | GaPaa’ | 52°52" | 976 | 124 | x8 | 68227 | 8°20 3°. |. .93%,j:64°.24° | 35°14" | . 767 1°46 | 119 +| 67° 53° 10° 19 ‘70 | Bs S169? 56° | 36° 19° | 204 | ex 120 | 67° 29° | 11° 32" 65°31" | 30°45 | ; 213° 7 121 + 66° 50° 13° a0" 6°7 95 _| 65° 14° | 30° 39° 752 : Box 122 | 66°42" | 14° 44" 5°5 96 | 65° 24’ | 29° oo! 735 1°2 123 | 66°52’ | 15°40’ 4°2 97 | 65° 28} 27°39' | 450 | 5°S | 124° | 67°40" | 15° 40° 98 65° 38’ | 26° 27’ 138 5°9 125 . 68° es 8 1 02" 99 | 66°13 | 25°53" 187 6°r 126 | 67°19' | 15°52 4°3 100 66° 23’ | 14° 02" 59 0°4 127 66° 3s) nee os’ 4°r IOI 66° 23° | 12°05 537. | —0°7 128 66° 50’. | 20° 02" 3°6 102 66° 23’ | 10° 26° 750 | —0°% 129 . 66° 35° 23° 47 : 4°5 103 | 66°23" 8° 52° 579 | —0°%6 130 °| 63°00" 1 Seo" BT 4°4 104 66° 23° 7° 25 957 191 131 63° 00’ | 19° 09" 4°o 105 65° 34’ ooo 762 | —o°8 132 63° 00° | 17° 04! LGR 106 65°°34" 8° 54’ 447 | —0%6 133 63° 14’ | 11° 24° 4°1 65° 29° 8° 40° 466 18 62° 34’ | 10° 26° 3°5 107 | 65°33° | 10°28 492 | —0°3 135 | 62°48’ | 9° 48’ 108 65° 30° | 12° 00° 97 1°r 136 63° or’ 9° 18 Tog | 65°29’ | 13° 25° 38 1 137. | 63°14 | 8°31" 4°8 110 66° 44’ | 11° 33° 781 | —o°8 138 63° 26° 7° 56 III 67° 14 8° 48° 860 | —o% 139 . 63° 36° 4 7° 30 : 112 67° 57’ 6° 44’ 1267 |: —1° 140 63° 29° 6° 57° 113 69° 31” 7° 06" 1309 | —I°0 141 63° 22" 6° 58" 6°9 114 | 70°36 | 7° 29° 773° | 10 142 | 63°07’ | 7°05 8°4 115 70° 50° 8° 29’ 86 o°r 143 62° 58" 7° 09! 4°4 116 70° 05° 8° 26’ 371 —o°4 144 O2P Agi AP tas eg 117 69° 13 8°23; 1003. | —I°o as Ps IBRAR OP THE ad: UNIVERSITY» OF y, CAL roRNIS “~ irae + eh eng 4 ‘ 5 A