A MONOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING CRIN0ID8 429 



species. The mimerous specimens recorded here as Phanogenia novae-guineae repre- 

 sent in reality Comaster fruticosus. 



In 1909 in a discussion of the new species Comanthus [Comantheria] polycnemis 

 I stated that Bell's variabilis and the multifida of Miiller and of Carpenter do not 

 belong in the Parmcirra group where they were placed by Carpenter, but instead are 

 nearly related to Phanogenia tijpica. In another paper I recorded, and gave extended 

 notes upon, a specimen which had been dredged by the German steamer Ga2elle north 

 of Port Walcott, and in a third paper I recorded and described a specimen from Fiji 

 in the Copenhagen Museum which bore the manuscript name Actinoinetra sfellata of 

 Liitken, and which had previously been studied by Carpenter. The example 

 recorded under the name of Comaster norae-guineae in this last paper is the type 

 specimen of C. schonovi. 



Having discovered my error in regard to rmiltifida, I published a correction of it 

 in 1909. By describing Alecio multifida, Miiller had in effect fixed the identity of 

 Lamarck's Comatula multiradiata, which is not identical with the Linnean Asterias 

 multiradiata. Carpenter's multifida is the same as Miiller's multifida. I remarked 

 that Alecto multifida is a somewhat anomalous species congeneric with, though not 

 closely related to, Phanogenia typica of Lov^n. This incorrect statement was due to 

 my having at hand a specimen from the Philippines which I had determined as 

 multifida, but which I later found to be a wholly different type and described under 

 the name of Comaster taviana. 



In 1910 I examined the type specimen of multifida, in the Paris Museum and 

 Bell's material in the British Museum. In 1911 in a paper on the recent crinoids 

 in the Paris Museum I published a detailed account of Miiller's type and remarked 

 that it is the same as the Adinometra variabilis of Bell and a derivative from Comaster 

 typica, which is found only in the waters of northern Australia. 



In a paper on the recent crinoids of the Leyden Museum, published in the same 

 year, I gave notes upon the specimen from Jobie recorded as Adinometra typica by 

 Carpenter, and upon the type of Miiller's Alecto novae-guineae. The specimens of 

 novae-guineae of a rough and spinous character which are mentioned in this paper are 

 in reaUty C.Jruticosus. 



In a monograph on the crinoids of Australia, also published in 1911, I described 

 a specimen of C. typica from Port Molle, listed all the known Australian records, and 

 gave an annotated synonymy and a summary of the range. Comaster multifida was 

 treated separately as "a curious local derivative from the comparatively widely 

 spread C. typica tj'pe." 



In a memoir on the crinoids of southwestern Australia published in 1911 I gave 

 a summary of the occurrence of Comaster typica on the Australian coasts, with a com- 

 plete list of localities. The 3 specimens recorded and described, however, represent 

 C. belli and not C. typica. 



In another paper published in 1911 I discussed the relationships of typica and 

 multifida and noted that Bell's variabilis was based upon specimens of both, the type 

 being a specimen of typica. I mentioned that a specimen of Comaster multifida which 

 I had recorded from the Albatross Philippine collections fitted the available descrip- 

 tions of multifida exactly, but that when I examined the type of the latter in Paris 



