4 THE VOYAGE OF H.M.S. CHALLENGER. 



examined a very large number of Coniatuhe ; and I have almost always found a 

 terminal comb on the oral pinnules of those species which have an excentric mouth ; 

 while a variety of other characters are more or less constantly associated with these, as 

 w T ill be explained in detail further on. 



In the year 1866 a new Comatulid genus, Phanogenia, was established by Loven 1 for 

 a remarkable tropical species with a stellate centro-dorsal bearing a few rudimentary 

 cirrus- stumps. The dredgings of the Challenger, however, have shown that this 

 condition is common to several species of Actinometra, with which the genus Phanogenia 

 corresponds in all essential respects. A third new genus of Comatulae was established in 

 1868 by Semper 2 for a little five-armed type which he had discovered in the Philippines. 

 He called it Ophiocrinus, and for some years it was regarded merely as a subgenus of 

 Antedon. Eventually, however, after examination of the three species obtained by the 

 Challenger in the Pacific, together with Semper's original specimen, I satisfied myself 

 of its claim to generic rank, and I proposed to call it Eudiocrinus, 5 instead of by Semper's 

 name Ophiocrinus which had been preoccupied by Salter. But about the same time that 

 this new generic name was proposed on account of all the known species being limited to 

 the Pacific Ocean, another specific type was discovered by the " Travailleur " in European 

 seas, and it was subsequently described by Perrier 4 as Eudiocrinus atlanticus. 



One other genus of recent Crinoids, has been described, besides those just mentioned 

 {Antedon, Actinometra, Phanogenia and Eudiocrinus), viz., Comaster, Agassiz. 5 The 

 leading character of this genus, according to its proposer, depended upon the number of 

 divisions in the arms, and was rightly disregarded by Goldfuss e who thought more of the 

 presence of basals on the exterior of the calyx as a generic distinction. Miiller 7 adopted 

 the genus in the sense in which it was understood by Goldfuss ; but he seems eventually 

 to have abandoned it altogether. 8 This will doubtless prove to be its ultimate fate, as it 

 has not been seen by any naturalist since the time of Goldfuss, wdiose original specimen 

 of it was dissected and has since disappeared. If his account of it is correct, Comaster 

 must be a very remarkable type, differing in many respects from all other recent Comatulae, 

 as I have explained elsewhere ; 9 but I am strongly inclined to believe that its apparent 

 peculiarities are merely due to the w T ant of knowledge respecting the internal structure of 



1 Phanogenia, et hittills okiindt slagte af fria Crinoideer, Dfversigt. k. Vetensk. Akad. FbrhandL, 1866, p. 231. 



2 Ophiocrinus, eine neue Cornatuliden Gattung, Archivf. Naturgesch., 1868, Jahrg. xxxiv., Bd. i. p. 68. 



3 Descriptions of new or little known Comatuhe. I. On the species of Atelecrinus and Eudiocrinus, Journ. Linn. 

 Soc. Load. (Zool.), 1882, vol. xvi. p. 493. 



4 Sur des Eudiocrinus de lAtlantique et sur la nature de la faune des grandes profondeurs, Comptes rendus, 1883, 

 t. xcvi. pp. 725-728. 



5 Prodrome d'une Monographie des Radiaires ou Echinoderraes, Mem. Soc. Nat. Sci. Neuch., 1835, t. i., p. 193. 



6 Beitrage zur Petrefactenkiinde, Nova Acta Acad. Oses. Leop., 1839, Bd. xix. A. p. 348. 



7 Ueber die Gattungen und Arten der Comatulen, Monatsber. d. k. preuss. Akad. d. wiss. Berlin, 1841, p. 180. 



8 Abhandl. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. Berlin, 1849, p. 244. 



9 Journ. Linn. Soc. Lond (Zool.), 1877, vol. xiii. pp. 454-456. 



