The Echinoderm Fauna of South Africa. 281 



* ASTERINA PENICILLAR1S 



Asterias penicillaris Lamarck, 1816. Aniin. s. Vert., vol. 2, p. 555. 

 Asterina penicillaris von Martens, 1866. Arch. f. Naturg., Jhrg. 32, 



Bd. 1, p. 74. 



This species is very imperfectly known and has never been figured, 

 so far as I can learn. Goto (1914, Mon. Jap. Ast., pt. 1, p. 651) 

 denies its occurrence in Japan and says that the specimens, which 

 Sladen, in the Challenger Report, recorded from Kobe represent a 

 new species which he describes under the name batheri. Meissner 

 (1892, Arch. f. Naturg., Jhrg. 58, Bd. 1, p. 187) records five specimens 

 of penicillaris from Cape Town. One of these, and a similar one 

 from the Red Sea, are now in the M. C. Z. collection, received in 

 exchange from the Berlin Museum. They seem to me to belong to 

 the following species (granifera}, which has been rather fully described 

 by Perrier from specimens from Table Bay, Cape of Good Hope. 

 But Perrier makes no reference whatever to penicillaris and 1 am 

 not at all sure that granifera and penicillaris are not synonymous. 

 At any rate, if distinct, they must be very nearly related. 



ASTERINA GRANIFERA. 

 Plate XVII. Figs. 1, 2. 



Patiria granifera Gray, 1847. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, p. 82. 

 Asterina granifera Perrier, 1876. Arch. Zool. Exp., vol. 5, p. 239. 



This is another little known and unfigured species of Asterina, 

 recorded as yet only from the Cape of Good Hope. There are a 

 number of Asterinas in the PIETER FAURE collection which seem to 

 me better referred to this species than to any other. Perrier's des- 

 cription is adequate and I hope the two figures given herewith may 

 serve to make the species easily recognizable henceforth. The spe- 

 cimens before me range in size from R = 20 to R = 45 mm. The 

 smallest specimen has the rays flatter and less tapering that in the 

 larger ones, the abactinal secondary plates and the papulae are fewer 

 in number and the abactinal spinelets are smaller and more pointed ; 

 orally there is little difference. The specimens from P.F. 3010 are 

 so similar to the figures and description of Parasterina bellida given 

 by Sladen (/. c.) that if they were the only ones before me, I should 

 refer them to that species. But I fail to find any character by which 

 they can be certainly distinguished from the others and I must there- 

 fore refer them to the older species. 



One of the specimens from P.F. 15908 is remarkable for apparently 



