ECHINOIDEA. I. i^g 



Further it has been taken on 63" 30' N. L. 13° 39' W. L. 92 fathoms (Wandel. 1890). 



Otherwise this species occiirs in the North-European seas up to north of Norway, at the British 

 coasts, aloiig South Europe iuto the Mediterranean; whether it is also found at the Azores is for 

 the present uncertain (K o e h 1 e r. 229. p. 23). It is found on depths between ca. 20 — ca. 700 fathoms. 

 Althoiigh in the Norwegian North Sea Expedition it is noted from a couple of stations with negative 

 bottoni temperature, its home must doubtless be said to be the warmer regions with positive bottom 

 temperature. It does not occur in the cold area of the Norwegian Sea. 



According to the statements given in the Hterature it is much wider distributed, is cosmo- 

 politan, and ranges to a dejjtli of 2435 fathoms (Chall. Ech. p. 213 — 14). As has already repeatedly 

 been shown above, niany of these statements are founded on wrong determinations, and to judge by 

 these there is all probability that also the other statements, according to which JIc//. aciitns (or iior- 

 vf giens) is said to occur outside of the territory stated above, are founded on wrong determinations. 

 The piaces from which it is mentioned are: the eastern coast of North America to Florida, Ascension, 

 the western coast of Patagonia, the Kermadec Islands, and Japan. As to the occurrence at the Atlantic 

 coasts of North America, I cannot, of course, control the numerous statements of Ech. iiorvcgicus being 

 found there; but the specimens that our museum has received from U. S. National Museum under 

 the name of Ech. uorvcgicus^ at all events, are not this species, but Ecli. a/fims^ and the statements in 

 Chall. Ech. p. 117 that E,cli. iiorvcgicus has been taken on sts. 46 and 47 (off Cape Cod) are also founded 

 on wrong determinations, what I have had occasion to substantiate during my stay at British Museum 

 — these specimens are also E^cli. affiiiis. Also EcJi. ncitius is in Chall. Ech. (p. 115) mentioned from 

 the same place (st. 46); to be sure, I have not seen the specimens upon which this statement is 

 founded, but considering how it is with Ecii. iiorvcgicus from the same station, and as the statement 

 of Ech. clcgans being found at the same place is also founded on a wrong determination (it is Ech. 

 .ilexaiidri\ I think it best to reraain sceptical with regard to Edi. aciitiis from st. 46 — and upon 

 the whole with regard to all statements of the occurrence of this species off North America. The 

 specimens from Ascension (Chall. st. 343) referred by Agassiz to Ecli. acittiis belong to another, new 

 species, described above (p. 100) by the name of EcJi. atlanticus. 



From the western coast of Patagonia (Chall. st. 308) Agassiz mentions Ecli. iiorvrgictis\ in 

 British Museum I have seen the .specimens upon which this statement is founded; they are two 

 different species, viz. Strrccliiiiits inagcllaiiiciis and an /rV///////.f-species, probably a new one, but at all 

 events closely allied to Ech. clcgans^ accordingly belonging to another group of species than Ech. 

 aciihis. From the Kermadec Islands (Chall. st. 170) Ech. acittns is mentioned; it is a large, fine 

 specimen of EcJi. affiiiis, as far as I was able to decide b\- a short examination; at all events it has 

 nothing to do with Ecli. acittns. With regard to the occurrence of this species at Japan, finally, Ech. 

 norvegicus is in Chall. Ech. (p. 117) mentioned from this locality (sts. 232 and 235); I have .seen two 

 specimens from st. 232, which are, no doubt, Ech. liicidus Doderl. No more than all the abo\'e men- 

 tioned .specimens they have anything to do with EaIi. iiorvigiciis. I have not seen the .specimens 

 from st. 235, but there can, I think, scarcely be any doubt that they are the same species as those 

 from st. 232. — With this I think that the pretended enormous distribution of Ech. acutiis is refuted. 

 As far as we hitherto kuow, it occurs only in the North-European seas and the Mediterranean. 



