A MONOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING CRINOIDS 341 



cirri of the two other Indian Ocean species, T. carinata and T. encrinus {=clarki), 

 are stout and large, especially iii the first named, which has the largest cirri of any of 

 the smaller species of the genus; the cirri of T. carinata are easily distinguished by 

 their very short segments. I said that as yet I had not been able to examuie a suffi- 

 cient number of specimens of this animal to justify me in bestowing upon it a new 

 specific name. I noted that East Indian specimens of species of this genus appear 

 to be very rare. 



Hartlaub in 1912 mcluded Ceylon among the locahties for Antedon carinata, 

 taking his infonnation from Carpenter, 1888. 



In a paper on the crinoids of the Berlin Aluseum published in 1912, I said that 

 Tropiom-etra encrinus as understood by me in 1911 is in reahty a composite including 

 three species, Tropiom-etra encrinus, T. avxJouini, new species, and T. indica, new 

 species. Under the heading Tropiomeira audouini I said that this new form is nearest 

 to T. ind'lca from Ceylon and gave a brief summary of the cliaracters of the latter, 

 saj'uig that I had e.xamincd 48 specimens, all from Ceylon or adjacent parts of India. 

 In my memoir on the crinoids of the Indian Ocean published in 1912, I included 

 under Tropiomeira encrinus specimens from the Red Sea, Ceylon, and eastward. 

 I recorded 17 small or medium-sized specimens from Ceylon and gave a summary of 

 the characters presented by a series of specimens from Ceylon that I had e.xamined 

 at the British Museum in 1910. In a paper on the crinoids of the British Museum 

 published in 1913, under Tropiomeira indica, 1 gave a brief description of 14 specimens 

 from Ceylon that had originally been recorded by Professor Bell as Antedon adeonae, 

 and listed three others from Ceylon and one from Tuticorin. 



Dr. August Reichensperger in 1913 exanimed carefully the status oi Tropiomeira 

 encrinus as given in my paper on the crinoids of the coasts of Africa and in my memoir 

 on the crinoids of the Indian Ocean. He said that it seemed to him very questionable 

 whether encrinus could be regarded as a species distinct from carinata; at the most 

 it might be possible to maintain it as a geographical variety. He said that the limits 

 of their ranges mterdigitate, and recalled that I restricted T. carinata to the east 

 and south African region, saying that T. encrinus occurs from Aden to the East 

 Indies and farther eastward, and is especially common at Ceylon. He noted that I 

 (191 1) based T. encrinus exclusively on the fonn of the cLnu and of the cirrus segments 

 and that little of a definite nature can be deduced from my statements. The smgle 

 differential character that is to a certain extent valid in separating carinata from 

 encrinus is that encrinus sometimes has three rows of cirri; but this character does 

 not always hold, as is shown by his specimens (from Ceylon). Just as little is to be 

 gathered from the carijiation of the arms or the stiffness of the lower pinnules. He 

 said that in 1909 I was of his opmion when I wrote "specimens from South Africa, 

 east Africa, the East Indies and the South Pacific are very uniform iji their characters, 

 and agree in having a moderate or slight carination of the braciiials." At the same 

 time, he recalled, I wrote that in specimens from Brazil and the West Indies the 

 brachial carination as a rule is stronger, and it may be exceptionally strong, in which 

 case the ends of the piiuiule and cirrus segments are spuij-; but on the other hand 

 specimens may readily be found quite as smooth as any from the Indian Ocean. 

 Of Reichensperger's 11 specimens from Ceylon four showed no indication of a third 

 row of cirri. The number of cirrus segments was most constant, 20-22; but the 



