388 THE VOYAGE OF H.M.S. CHALLENGER. 
2. Nepanthia maculata, Gray (P]. LXIV. figs. 1-4). 
Nepanthia maculata, Gray, 1840, Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., vol. vi. p. 287. 
Chetaster (?) maculatus, Miiller and Troschel, 1842, System der Asteriden, p. 28. 
1 Chetaster cylindratus, Mébius, 1859, Neue Seesterne des Hamburger and Kieler Museums, p. 1, 
Taf. 1, figs. 3 and 4 (Abhandl. a. d. Gebiete Naturw. hrsg. v. d. naturwiss. Verein, Hamburg, 
Bd. iv. Abth. 2, 1860). 
Asterina (Nepanthia) maculata, Perrier, 1876, Révis. Stell. Mus., p. 322 (Archives de Zool. expér., 
t. v., p. 242). 
Locality.—Station 188. In the Arafura Sea. September 10,1874. Lat. 9° 59’ 0”S., 
long. 139° 42’ 0” EK. Depth 28 fathoms. Green mud. Surface temperature 78°°5 Fahr. 
Remarks.—Only a single example of this handsome species was procured by the 
Challenger. I have given drawings, as the form is little known, and the descriptions pub- 
lished are rather vague in some respects. 
With regard to the adambulacral armature it may be mentioned that I believe the 
drawing given on Pl. LXIV. fig. 4, represents the natural posture of the spinelets during 
life. In a few favourable instances in the specimen under notice they may be seen thus 
disposed, but usually when preserved in spirit and in the dry condition the spinelets on the 
actinal surface of the adambulacral plates are drawn together and form a compact group, 
which closely resembles in form and character the groups of fine spinelets on the adjacent 
intermediate plates, 
I have examined the type of Mébius’ Chataster cylindratus in the Hamburg Museum, 
and, though I have not compared it side by side with Gray’s example, I feel little hesita- 
tion in regarding it as the same species. 
Genus Asterina, Nardo. 
Asterina, Nardo, De Asteriis, Oken’s Isis, 1834, p. 716. 
Asteriscus (pars), Miiller and Troschel, Monatsber. d. k. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss, Berlin, 1840 (April), 
p. 104. 
This well-characterised genus has been subjected to comparatively few changes at the 
hands of classifiers. Perrier’ pointed out that there is no sufficient reason for discarding 
the name given by Nardo in favour of Asteriscus proposed by Miiller and Troschel on the 
ground that the word in question was employed by Llhuyd and Linck. Asteriscus was 
not used in the sense of a generic name anterior to 1840. 
Notwithstanding the considerable number of species, the amount of structural varia- 
tion within the limits of the genus which they represent is comparatively small. 
The distribution of the genus is almost cosmopolitan, but confined to the tropical and 
temperate seas. 
1 Révis. Stell. Mus., p. 294 (Archives de Zool. expér., 1876, t. v., p. 214). 
