HCIIIXOIDEA. 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. a Concarneau, p. 46) regards A. rosezis 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 allongee et moms elevee; 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 pedicellaria;; till it is thus 

 proved to agree in all essential characters with flavescens I cannot consider A. roseus as a mere syno- 

 nym of flavescens. Another thing is that the true flavescens is probably also included in the descrip- 

 tion given by Forbes, but in case two species are confounded, the name roseus 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 Echinocardiiim australe). These specimens are certainly 

 very like the Ech. 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 (PI. II. Figs. 5, 6, n) 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 

 flavescens (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 flavesc- 

 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 mm 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 [ngotf-Exprdition. IV. 2. iS 



