A MONOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING CRINOIDS 643 



spines which are not very stout. Those are developed on the distal portion of the 

 segments. The opposing spine is not larger than the preceding spines. The terminal 

 claw is a little longer than the penultimate segment and is curved. 



The radials are visible as a narrow ring about the centrodorsal. 



There are 32 arms, of which the anterior are 90 mm. long and the posterior 

 50 mm. 



The genital pinnules are slightly swollen. The tips of the pinnules are yellowish. 



In the other specimen from Mjoberg's station 5 the centrodorsal is a little thicker, 

 flat, without a swollen margin. 



The cirri are XII, 14, 6 mm. long, arranged in groups in the interradial angles. 

 The segments are without distinct dorsal spines. 



The radials are concealed. The IIBr series are 4 (3 + 4). Of the 11 IIIBr 

 series present, 7 are 4 (3 + 4) and 4 are 2. Both of the IVBr series present are 4 

 (3 + 4). 



The arras are 33 in number, the anterior 105 mm. and the posterior 60 mm. in 

 length. The brachials have more strongly produced distal ends than is the case in 

 the preceding specimen. 



There are about 10 teeth in the combs of the pro.ximal pinnules. The swollen 

 genital pinnules begin at Py, but are not very marked. 



The dorsal side of the arms is yellow in alcohol. 



Dr. H. L. Clark wrote that this species is the most perplexing comatulid found 

 at Mer, for, while typical specimens are easily recognized, the intergradations with 

 timorensis (annulata) are very puzzling. Moreover, the individuals which seem to be 

 undoubtedly pardcirra differ so among themselves that it is hard to believe they 

 represent a single species. 



He figured in colors the arms of 2 specimens, and remarked that the figure of an 

 arm of a red and white form seems very different from the arm of a grayish form. 

 Not only in the color but also in the shape of the arm the differences are very great. 

 But as preserved the specimens look less unlike each other, and a careful comparison 

 fails to show any good reason why they should not both be called parvicirra. 



He said it will be observed that the grayish individuals have the brachials yellow 

 brown, with the articulations and the pinnules purplish brown, but the general effect 

 both in Ufe and in alcohol is gray. One of the most strikingly colored indi\nduals 

 seen was greenish yellow and rich rod purple, while another has the basal half of the 

 arms red and white, with the distal half bright greenish yellow. 



He concluded that it is evident little reliance can be placed on color to help in 

 distinguishing parvicirra, yet it is certain that very dark colored specimens were not 

 noted at Mer, and, except for the grayish specimens, bright colors were the rule. 



The shade of red in the red and white individuals is elusive, for while in bright 

 sunlight it seems to be almost rose red, with less illumination it is more a dull blood 

 red, and in shade it becomes almost a light liver browTi. It is quite fugitive in 

 alcohol, the speciuicn becoming more or less hght brown. 



Doctor Clark said that, aside from the matter of color, parvicirra is distinguish- 

 able from annulata by its lighter and more fragile structure, the presence of some 

 cir7-i, and the relatively small number of arms. 



