ECHINOIDEA. I. 



27 



the specimen (or speciniens?), whicli Studer has had, with young ones 011 the apical area, is not 

 G.menibranipora (= nufrix)^ but caiialicitlafa, and then it is scarcely from Kerguelen (comp. the fol- 

 lowing about the occurrence of these two sjjecies). When the pedicellariæ are not examined — which 

 has evidently not been done by Studer — it is, as has been stated above, not always to be decided 

 with certainty, to which of the two species a specimen in hånd belongs; this wiU especially hold good, 

 when, as the case has been here, the apical area is not to be seen. 



Among the rather numerous speciniens of these two species exam ned by me (from iChal- 

 lenger > at British Museum), Sf. canaliculata was only taken at the Falkland Islands and a station near 

 those islands, Chalh . st. 315, St.nutrix only at Kerguelen. Some specimens from st i5o(«Chall. ) near 

 Kerguelen, 150 fathoms, have pedicellariæ as those of the typical St. imfrix but the spines are much 

 longer, three times the diameter of the test; perhaps it is a separate species. Wyv. Thomson (397) 

 mentious C. intfrix from Kerguelen, G. canaliculata from the Falkland Islands. In the same way 

 S tuder' s G. vivipara (= canaliculata) is from Patagonia, his G. iiiciubranipora from Kerguelen. Thus 

 it would seem that these two species do not occur together; St. canaliculata is found at the southern 

 coasts of South America, St.nutrix at Kerguelen. Agassiz, to be sure, mentious St. canaliculata from 

 several other localities at Kerguelen, but according to what is .shown here his statement is not to be 

 relied upon. Until a definite proof of the opposite faet comes forth, I must believe that either of these 

 species has a territory of its own, as represented here. 



Among the deep-sea specimens referred by Agassiz to G. canaliculata, I have only examined 

 two from Chall. st. 156 (the South Polar Sea, 1975 fathoms). No doubt they represent another species. 

 The large globiferous pedicellariæ (PI. VIII, Fig. 35) recall very much those of the G^;//or/^am-species, 

 but the small ones are like those in canaliculata and nutrix; and thus it would seem that this species 

 must also be referred to Stcrcocidaris. The ground-colour is very dark, almost black; the primary 

 spines are white, the actinal ones highly inden ted in the edge. Perhaps it may prove to be identical 

 with ^Porocidaris- inccrta Koehler. I have not examined the specimens from st. 147 (1600 fathoms) 

 and 153 (1675 fathoms), but that the>- are not identical with St. canaliciilafa or mttrix, which live on 

 shallow water, may be said a priori with a great deal of probability. 



Goniocidaris Morte nscni Koehler. Koehler (233a) in his excellent description of this species 

 mentions only one form of pedicellariæ with « ordinairement un ou deux crochets plus ou moins 

 marqués>> at the point of the valves. This statement does not give sufficiently clear information, 

 neither does the figure of a wliole pedicellaria given by Koehler show the systematically important 

 structures in a sufficiently exact way. Prof. v. Beneden has most kindly sent me a couple of speci- 

 mens for examination, so that I am able to supph' the informations wanting, and assign to this 

 uncommonly fine and characteristic. species its place in the system. The large globiferous pedicellariæ 

 have no end-tooth; the\- are quite similar to those of Stcrcocidaris nutrix, so that I can simply refer 

 to the figures of the latter. The small globiferous pedicellariæ are rather characteristic (PI. VIII, 

 Fig. 34); the>- have na end-tooth, and the opening is small they recall those of c Poroc idaris ^ inccrta 

 very much. The spicules simple. Accordingly this species is no Goniocidaris, but will probably have 

 to be referred to the genus Stcrcocidaris, to which genus perhaps also ^.Porocidarisy> inccrta ought to 

 be referred. 



