362 VERRILL 



good, for his lutkenii is padophoric. In a later work (1896, p. 35) he 

 revived Podasterias, with P. liitkeni Perrier as the type. 



Fisher, 1908, p. 8g, considered liitkeni Perrier a Pisaster, and sug- 

 gested a change of name, owing to the priority of Pisaster liitkenii 

 (Stimpson). They are not congeneric, the latter being nionacanthid, 

 and therefore no change is needed in the specific name. 



Genus Cryptasterias Verrill, nov. 



Type, Diplasterias lurqueti Koehler, 1905, p. 465. 



This is diplacanthid and has a reticulated dorsal skeleton entirely 

 concealed by a thick dermis. The dorsal surface bears soft dermal 

 papillae, some of which bear a few pedicellariae ; others, scattered, con- 

 tain rudimentary spinules. There is a simple row of superomarginal 

 spines and a double row of inferomarginals ; apparently there are 

 no interactinal plates. It is supposed to incubate its young. Antarctic. 



STICHASTER STRIATUS Muller and Troschel, 1840. 



Asterias aurantiaca Meyen, Reise um die Erde, i, p. 292, 1834 (non Linne). 

 Stichaster strialus Muller and Troschel, op. cit., 1840, p. 321 (non Asterias 



striatus Lam.). 

 Stichaster aurantiacus Verrill, 1867, p. 293. Clark, 1910, p. 337, pi. vui, fig. I. 

 Tonia atlantica Gray, op. cit., 1840, p. 180; Synopsis, 1866, p. 2. 



This is, perhaps, the most abundant littoral starfish found on the 

 entire coast of Chile, south to Talcahuano, extending northward to 

 Callao, Peru (Yale Museum, F. H. Bradley). Common at Valpa- 

 raiso, on rocks. It grows to large size, up to 12 inches in diameter or 

 more. 



It is the true type of the genus Stichaster, being the only species 

 named when that genus was proposed in 1840. Perrier (1894, p. 131 ; 

 1896, p. 27) was in error in making Asterias rosea the type. (See 

 also Introduction, p. 40.) 



It is not generically related to any North Pacific species. It is per- 

 haps the only known species that can be properly referred to the 

 genus Stichaster. Nearly all those referred to it by Sladen and others 

 have already been separated generically,' except, perhaps, 6". polyplax 

 of the Australian region. This should clearly be generically distinct. 

 I would propose for it the name Allostichaster. 



' Perrier, 1894, proposed the genus Granaster for Stichaster nutrix Std. ; but 

 G. biseriatus Koehler (antarctic) seems to be a distinct genus, as it has only 

 two rows of podia. It may be called HEMIASTF.RIAS with biseriatus as 

 the type. 



