i62 DISCOVERY REPORTS 



It is probable that Echinaster smithi Ludwig (1903, p. 34) belongs in Rhopiella. It 

 was dredged in 450 m., 71° 18' S, 88° 02' W. The papulae are numerous, 3-6 to the 

 skeletal meshes. In the absence of figures it is not possible to determine whether the 

 species is the same as any one of the three described by Koehler. 



Genus Henricia Gray 



Henricia Gray, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., vi, 1840, p. 1S4. Type H. oculata Gray, i.e. Asterias sanguino- 



lenta O. F. Miiller. 

 Cribella Forbes (not Cribrella Agassiz, 1835), British Starfishes, 1S41, p. 100. 

 Cribrella Liitken, Vid. Medd. for 1856, 851, p. 93. 



The name Henricia is applied to a rather considerable number of extremely unstable 

 entities, for convenience called species, which are similar in a general way to members of 

 the adjacent genera Echinaster and Othilia. It differs chiefly in lacking the membrane 

 which unites the spines of the furrow edge, in the last 2 genera, into a continuous web 

 along the margin of furrow. Of only a few forms is there enough material for a critical 

 study of the species problem. This task is rendered all the more difficult because, added 

 to the paucity of suitable characters, there is an extraordinary variability, and a marked 

 tendency to what may be termed a structural equivalence in widely separated localities. 

 An instance of this is Henricia sufflata, Kermadec Islands, Henricia aspera, west coast of 

 North America, and Henricia obesa, Falkland region. So far as there are "species" in 

 sea stars, these three are probably perfectly distinct. Yet the extremes of variation of 

 each form very nearly bridge the gaps of structural difl^erence between the three. 

 Henricia has large eggs, and, so far as I am aware, pelagic larvae are not known in the 

 genus. It seems probable therefore that any environmental peculiarities would have a 

 maximum effect on individuals, and that here, if ever, we might expect to find small 

 species developing in the inevitably many suitable but different faunal situations available. 



This similarity of species from widely separated parts of the globe probably reveals a 

 real relationship. Such equivalent species are subdivisions therefore of a sort of super- 

 species of wide range. The same idea is carried out in the concept of a wide-ranging 

 species with numerous subspecies. 



In the case oi Hetiricia, representatives of more than one superspecies may occur in a 

 locality or region. If 2 or 3 such distinct strains (each with its variations) are regarded as 

 varieties oione species, confusion is piled on confusion. An instance of such a confusion 

 is to be found in the classification of the Magellanic-Falkland Henricias. Here repre- 

 sentatives of two distinct superspecies, H. obesa and H. stiideri, have been united with 

 the representative of yet a third, H. paginstecheri. Leipoldt (1895, pp. 578, 579) tossed 

 into this pot pourri, also, H. sufflata, H. sitnplex, and by implication the then composite 

 H. sangiiinolenta ! If these are one species, then any attempt to classify Henricia of the 

 shallow waters of the world becomes absolutely futile. 



As representatives of one of these "superspecies" I would adduce Henricia scabrior 

 (Michailovskij),^ H. aspera Fisher, H. obesa Sladen, H. sufflata Sladen. Another is 



1 S. G. Heding, 1935, p. 31. 



