338 BULLETIN 82, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM 



established, and so he placed them under P. angusticalyx, which was the first described 

 by Carpenter. He said it is remarkable that Carpenter, after ho had described these 

 two species at the same time, did not refer these specimens to one of them, but to 

 granulifera Pourtales, for which different specific characters hold good. This cir- 

 cumstance indicates, according to Hartlaub, that angusticalyx and inaequalis belong 

 to the extremely variable species granulifera Pourtales. But Hartlaub admitted that 

 the material available to him was not sufficient to admit of a definite opinion. 



Hartlaub noted that correlated with other features are the relationships of the 

 individual skeletal pieces of the calyx of inaequalis and angusticalyx as described and 

 figured by Carpenter. 



The form of the centrodorsal, as fur as the exterior is concerned, has been described. 

 In regard to the relative size relations of the centrodorsal and the radial pentagon the 

 smaller specimen, because of the visibility of the radials, agrees more with inaequalis. 

 The remaining differences between angusticalyx and inaequalis are, judging from 

 Carpenter's figures, not too significant, according to Hartlaub. In view of these figures, 

 the ornamentation of the articular faces of the radials show insignificant differences. 

 The muscular fossae in angusticalyx are smooth, in inaequalis ornamented with convex 

 ridges. In both the median (vertical) ridge, and also the lateral ridges separating the 

 muscular and interarticular ligament fossae are in agreement. The dorsal ligament 

 fossa, because of the greater size of the radials in inaequalis, seems to be more consider- 

 able than in angusticalyx. The differences in the ventral surface of the centrodorsal in 

 the two forms is trivial, those between the rosettes, according to Hartlaub, more 

 significant. In Hartlaub's opinion Carpenter gave too much weight to the differences 

 in the calyces of these two species. He remarked that in Carpenter's figures a complete 

 covering of the centrodorsal by the radial pentagon is not shown, and, further, he does 

 not understand how the comparison of individuals of different ages can be significant 

 for the differentiation of the species. 



Hartlaub closed his account of what he called Antedon angusticalyx from Blake 

 station 157 with a few remarks on geographical distribution. He said that Carpenter's 

 material of angusticalyx consisted of several specimens that had been dredged off the 

 Meangis Islands, between the Moluccas and the Philippines. The material of inaequalis 

 came from the neighborhood of the Kermadec Islands about 8° northnortheast of New 

 Zealand, and also from the neighborhood of Kandavu, Fiji. He said that both species 

 were heretofore knowm as Pacific forms, but he remarked that in contrast to this it is of 

 interest that his material is Atlantic, from the Caribbean Sea, and noted that this is not 

 without parallel in the genus Antedon (in the old sense), for, as an example, A. (Tropio- 

 metra) carinata is found at St. Lucia in the Caribbean Sea and has also been dredged in 

 the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, as well as on the Pacific coast of America (but see 

 Part 4b, pp. 319-323). 



Locality. — Blake station 157. 



Geographical range. — Known only from off Montserrat. 



Bathymetrical range. — Known only from 219 meters. 



