830 BULLETIN 82, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM VOLUME 1 



He noted that there wore known at that time 11 different individuals of representatives 

 of this genus, 1 each of A. cubensis and A. vn/villi, and 9 of A. balanoides. 



After Carpenter's death the Blake material was turned over to Dr. Clemens Hart- 

 laub, and a preliminary study of it was made under his supervision by Dr. Wilhclm 

 Minckert. In 1905 the latter published some notes on the occurrence of the syzygies 

 and on the pinnulation of Atelecrinus balanoides resulting from his study of these 

 specimens. 



Carpenter used the name (Atelecrinus) cubensis for the species represented by the 

 single specimen dredged at Bibb station 139P, crediting it to Pourtalfes. 



[Note by A.M.C] In the belief that the specific name cubensis was invalidated by 

 its prior use as Antedon cubensis by Pourtalds, Mr. Clark in 1907 renamed the species 

 represented by the smaller Bibb specimen as Atelecrinus pourtalesi. It seems to me that 

 this was unnecessary if Carpenter is considered as the authority for Atelecrinus cubensis, 

 as indeed he was, though he himself stiU credited the name to Pourtal^ in 1S82. Ilart- 

 laub (1912) has also pointed this out. However, as long as cubensis and balanoides 

 are regarded as synonymous, the problem does not arise. 



History [continued, by A.H.C.]. — In 1912 Hartlaub pubhshed a detailed account of 

 the Blake collections. Of the eight Blake specimens of A. balanoides mentioned by 

 Carpenter, he had before him only three, one each from stations 150, 151, and 260. He 

 quoted Carpenter extensively and redescribed the species on the basis of the available 

 material, giving photographic reproductions of all three specimens as well as of the type 

 specimen of Atelecrinus cubensis. He also quoted from a letter of mine written in De- 

 cember 1909 in which I had said that "Atelecrinus cubensis is nothing but an immature 

 specimen of A. balanoides." [Apparently Hartlaub remained unconvinced of this since 

 he captioned the photographs of the type specimen of cubensis under that name, besides 

 crediting it to Carpenter rather than PourtalSs. — A.M.C] In 1910 I examined the speci- 

 men of A. balanoides from Challenger station 122 at the British Museum, mentioning the 

 fact in 1913. Inl918I included A. balanoides in a key to aU the species of Atelecrinus 

 then known, naming cubensis and pourtalesi as synonyms, and in 1923 gave its range, 

 based on unpublished as well as published data. 



Remarks [by A.M.C.]. — The only recent record of balanoides is that of H. L. Clark 

 in 1941 from the collections of the Atlantis off Cuba. The five specimens from station 

 2990, he said, are fairly typical and the smaller ones probably had arms about 75 ram. 

 long. The largest has the calyx 7 mm. in diameter. He also recorded under the name 

 pourtalesi a specimen from station 3341, which revives the question as to whether or not 

 there are two species of Atelecrinus in the West Indian area. The photographs given 

 by Hartlaub of the lost type specimen of cubensis show that the ornamentation of the 

 centrodorsal was very marked, more so than is suggested by Carpenter's drawings. 

 Dr. H. L. Clark commented on a similar elaboration in the Atlantis specimen. The 

 articulations of the brachials in cubensis also appear to be much more expanded than 

 those of balanoides. 



Carpenter considered that the main differences between the two lie in the uniform 

 width of the visible part of the basals and in the more prominent proximal projections 

 of the axillaries and second brachials (i.e., synarthrial tubercles) in cubensis. The large 

 size of the basals is possibly attributable to the smaller size of the holotype of cubensis, 

 and the development of synarthrial tubercles is somewhat variable in other comatulid 

 species. However, Hartlaub added a further difference in that the first two brachials 



