74 



Salmacis (?) elegans Bell. (Report on the Echinoderms collected by Dr. Willey. — 

 A. Willey. Zoological Results. II. 1899. p. 135. PI. XVII. 1. 

 — Woodsi Ramsay. (Catalogue of the Echinodermata in the Australian Mu- 



seum. I. Echini. 1885. p. 18, 48. PI. II. 1-3. 



(„S. Desmoulinsii Agass." in Dujardin & Hupe : Histoire naturelle des Zoo- 

 phytes Échinodermes. 1862. p. 516 is no doubt a printing error for S. dussumieri, 

 which is not named there). 



The type specimen of S. varias is no longer in the Paris-Museum, so we 

 must be content with the assertion given by A. Agassiz (Rev. of Ech. p. 156) that 

 it is synonj'mous with rarispina. 



The type-specimen of S. globator is to be found neither in the Museum of 

 Paris nor in the collection of 1 École des mines. What Agassiz describes under 

 this name in „Rev. of Pxh." is no doubt S. uiryulata, var. Alexandra The S. glo- 

 bator of Bell (On some genera and species of the Temnopleuridæ p. 431) is partly 

 (a) S. virgulata, var. Alexandri, partly (/}) S. sphceroides, var. pyramidata. A specimen 

 from Dauma Island named S. globator is S. belli. The S. globator of „Challenger" 

 St. 146 is S. Alexandri. The S. globator of Bedford is S. sphceroides. (All these spe- 

 cimens I have examined in the British Museum.) The S. globatrix of Lovén pro- 

 bably is bicolor var. rarispina. 



S. rubrotinctiis Grube is probably S. bicolor, but as the type-specimen cannot 

 be found (Döderlein. p. 715), the question must remain a little uncertain. 



S. Woodsi Ramsay cannot from the description be referred with certainty 

 to any of the well known species. I have seen, however, in the British Museum 

 a specimen from Holothurian-Bank (1892) which has exactly the same form as 

 S. Woodsi, whereas it otherwise agrees completely with S. belli (only the large 

 globiferous pedicellariæ I have not found); but it is certainly a monstrosity. On 

 the narrow part of the test some small irregular bodies occur, probably of para- 

 sitic nature. There can thus scarcely be any doubt that S. Woodsi is only a mon- 

 strosity of S. belli (or perhaps the same monstrosity may occur also in other species). 



S. rufa Bell is a Psammechinus; some notes on this species are given below. 

 S. elegans Bell is a young Coelopleuriis Maillardi (Mich.). (The specimens were exa- 

 mined in the British Museum.) 



Finally I may give some further notes of „Salm. sulcata'". What Sladen 

 names thus in his paper „On the Asteroidea and Echinoidea of the Korean seas" 

 p. 439, is probably Salmacopsis olivacea; the tubercles are noncrenulate. Unfortu- 

 nately I could not find any globiferous pedicellariæ on these specimens. — The S. 

 sulcata of Bell from Port Denison (Echinoderms. „Alert", p. 118) are partly S. 

 sphceroides, partly S. dussumieri. What is meant by S. sulcata in Bell's paper „On 

 some genera and species of the Temnopleuridæ" I cannot say, as, unfortunately, I 

 forgot to make any note of it during my visil to London last summer. 



