1 i HINOIDEA. I. : -q 



the museum of Paris called Sir, gibbosus Val. (I. Galapagos. M. Rousseau. 1846). They arc Sphcer- 

 echinus granulans (or, if they Ik- really from Galapagos, another Spheerechinus-specits (australia?)). On 



the back of the label is written achete a Londres thus the locality cannot be regarded as reliable. 



Paracentrotus Gaimardi (p. 124). On a specimen of this species in the museum of Paris (the 

 type specimen of Ecli. aciculatus Hupe, which is a synonym of Gaimardi) I have found a small triden- 

 tate pedicellaria; it was somewhat broken, but showed nevertheless sufficiently that it is similar to 

 those of P. lividus, so that a specific character is scarcely to be found in it. 



Anthocidaris homalostoma (p. 125). The type specimens of Ech. homalostoma Va\. are two naked 

 tests that are really very similar to Anthocidaris\ but it cannot be decided by the naked tests whether 

 thev are the same species. The locality (New Zealand) tells against the identity. I have above (loc. 

 cit.) said that the name of homalostoma would have to be used whether they be identical or not. 

 According to the opinion of Doderleiu expressed to me, this is incorrect, and I shall readily submit 

 to his authority. Then the species will get the name of Anthocidaris crassispina lAg.). 



Strongylocentrotus uudus (pp. 126, 140). A specimen of this species (from Hakodadi - Japan) 

 I have examined in Strassburg. No globiferous pedicellarise were found on it, but the spicules show 

 it to be a genuine Strongylocentrotus. The tridentate pedicellariae occur in three different forms, as 

 in drebachiensis\ a short, broad one (i'5 mm ) resembling that figured on PL NX. Fig. 20; a long, narrow 

 one (2 mm ) resembling that figured on PI. XX. Fig. 6, only more serrate below: and finally a small one 

 (ca. o - 5 mm ), more particularly corresponding to the third form in drubachiciisis (PL XX. Fig. 4); it is simply 

 leaf-shaped with quite straight edge, without marked indentations. The other pedicellariae show no 

 peculiarities. 



Strongylocentrotus Mexican its (pp. 126, 140). The specimens from Chili mentioned by Sluiter 

 (371), are Echinometrids — but whether the} - be really Str. mexicanus, is perhaps not quite sure, so 

 the systematic position of this species must continue to be regarded as doubtful. 



Echi ntts elegans (p. 145). The specimens from Cape Yerd ( (xazelle ) noted by Stttder as Ecli. 

 elegans?, are two small naked tests; one is doubtless Genocidaris maculata, the other I suppose to be 

 a Parechznus, but it cannot be decided with certainty. 



Ecliinus affinis (p. 152). For this species I can add one more locality, having found in the 

 museum of Paris some specimens from 39" 38' N.I,. 70° 56' \V. L. 1241 fathoms (Blake ); they were 

 called Ech. norvegicus. 



Echinus a at fits, var. norvegicus (p. 155). Some small specimens from the Faroe Channel 

 ( Michael Sars 150—217 fathoms, Ad. S. Jensen) have a primary tubercle on all the ambulacral plates 

 and upon the whole in regular series; they are only irregular as to size, especially a few ones at the 

 ambitus being disproportionately large. Upon the whole the ambulacral areas have here quite the 

 same appearance as in some specimens of Ech. affinis. They are then to be distinguished from this 

 species by the colour and the globiferous pedicellariee, the latter having in affinis 2—2 (more rarely 

 2—3) lateral teeth, while in norvegicus they have 1 ■— 1 or 1—2 lateral teeth. The tridentate pedicellarise 

 of the two species are so similar, that no distinguishing character can be found in this feature. On 

 the other hand the spicules of the stalk of the pedicellariae is a good character of norvegicus — when 

 they are found, but they are no constant feature. -- Evidently Ech. affinis is more particularly allied 



23* 



