BIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF WOODS HOLE AND VICINITY. WE 
to (Amphiopius abdita (Verrill)), which was taken at about the same time by Mr. G. M. 
Gray and by our own collectors on the Fish Hawk, and has since been dredged by us 
on several occasions.* It appears, indeed, that this species is not uncommon in local 
waters, and the same has proved to be true of the holothurian Caudina arenata, which 
was previously regarded as very rare locally. 
Reference to the comparative table on page 88 snows that the phylum of Echino- 
dermata is very poorly represented in the Woods Hole region, as compared with each of 
the othef localities which have been considered. For the phylum as a whole we have 
the following figures: Woods Hole, 24(+1?); Eastern Canada, 71; Plymouth, 36; Irish 
Sea, 35; Triest, 37. 
In the case of the Asteroidea and Ophiuroidea in particular, these figures are uni- 
formly higher for the other stations than for Woods Hole. Again, our own list is the 
only one among them which is completely lacking in crinoids, for even Antedon has not 
thus far been met with in our waters. 
Fourteen of our 24 echinoderms are common to Whiteaves’s list for eastern Canada, 
while only 2 (perhaps only 1) are common to the Plymouth list. 
In making any comparisons between these faunal lists, the usual allowance must be 
made for the widely different areas to which they relate, as well as to the widely different 
ranges in depth. Comparisons with Plymouth or with Trieste appear to be much fairer 
than with either of the other regions, so far as area is concerned. 
The average number of species of echinoderms dredged at the 458 regular stations 
of the Survey was 1.9. The species which was encountered with greatest frequency was 
Asterias forbest, which was recorded from 206 of the stations. The only ones which 
were recorded from as many as one-fourth of the total number of stations are: 
Number of stations. 
WASPetiaS FOr bests) Fantasy aiee re < Yaa cla Salah wis 915 se arched od plate he Setanta ios 206 
Perea araChnsiSinatera esgic ttt et Ite a. & «aid yc nls de saga pa 170 
PT ACTA PUNCH ACN Ls We etits ails scoot ee rigs bl ale vie cus o soys Selai@iareem ate Semen ge 156 
Heniicia sanciinolentas cisco a Nene os en te Laie e ue ae ee eae 118 
Owing to the comparatively large size of most members of this phylum, and to the 
very limited number of species which occur in local waters, it seems likely that our list 
of echinoderms is particularly complete. If additions are made subsequently, it will 
probably be among the ophiuroids and the holothurians, some of which are of small 
size and given to burrowing or to concealment in crevices of stones, etc. It is likely, too, 
that our dredging records for this group are fairly free from errors of omission or con- 
fusion of one species with another. Reference should be made, however, to certain 
mistakes of identification, which we believe to have been made at first. 
(1) It is probable that during the early days of the work the younger specimens of 
Asterias vulgaris and A. jorbesi were sometimes confused in the field. So far as this con- 
fusion may relate to Vineyard Sound, the results can not be serious, since our later and 
more accurate exploration of the Sound has shown that both species occur throughout 
practically its entire length. As regards Buzzards Bay, specimens of Astertas vulgaris 
were recorded from five stations within its interior, which it has been decided to leave out 
of consideration in plotting the distribution chart for this species. The records have, 
a See Clark, in Science, Jan. 24, 1908, and Sumner, in American Naturalist, May, 1908. According to Dr. Clark, Mr. Gray’s 
specimen was taken in August, 1907 (exact date not stated). Our own first specimen was dredged on Aug. 6, 1907. Here, then, 
is a most perplexing question of priority! 
