420 s. goto: 



(sjn. St. Mchcri Gray and St. gracilis Möbits) and St. princeps, the latter 

 a new species. Sl^vden, however, makes some general remarks on the Pen- 

 fagœiasteridœ, from wliich the following extract may be made as bearing on 

 this species ['89, p. 261] : 



" I have substituted tlio generic name Ogmaster for that of Dorigona. 

 Tlie starfisli described by Gray in 1866 under the name of Dorigona 

 Q-eevesii is the same species as that pre-\'iously described by Müller 

 and Troschel in 1842 under the name of Goniodiscus capeJla. In 1865 

 VON Martens placed this form in a subgenus to which he gave the 

 name Ognw.stcr, ranking it under Grmioster. The claim of this form to 

 generic recognition has since been admitted, and it follows in my opinion 

 that the name of the starfish in question should therefore be Ogmas- 

 ter capiella (TM. & T.) ton Martens. (Its synonyma are Dorigona reevesii, 

 Gray, and Goniaster milUeri, Lütken ; but not Goniaster (Stellasfer) mi'dleri 

 of VON Martens). The Goniaster {Stcllaster) miiTleri of voN Martens is a 

 true Stellasfer, wliich is so nearly allied to Stellaster equestris that I am unable 

 to distinguish it, and I am therefore constrained to consider Goniaster mi'dleri 

 as a synonym of that species. Both Lütken and Perrier have been in 

 error in regarding VON Martens' form as identical with the species described 

 by Gray as Dorigona reevcsii.^^ Again, he makes the following remarks on 

 the genus Stellaster ['89, p. 321] : 



" I consider that this genus well merits independent recognition, and 

 that in any case its sti-uctiu'al characters do not justify its being regarded 

 as a mere subdivision of the genus Pentagona stcr, unless the limits of that 

 genus are made much more extended than has ever yet been proposed by 

 any classifier. To take such a step would be in my opinion to ignore alto- 

 gether what should be recognised as the characters of a genus, and would 

 almost necessitate a reversion to the old idea of a genus founded on single 

 arbitrary characters rather than on tlie consideration of the affinities and 

 differences of its morphological structure as a whole. 



" Stellaster is in many respects structmully related to GoniodiscuSy 

 as limited by M. Perrier, and I have placed them in the same sub- 

 family." 



