ECHIXOiniU. I. 



179 



the nuisenm of Paris cailed .SY/-, gibbosus Val. (I. Galapagos. AI. Rous.seaTi. 1846). They are Sphær- 



echinus gratmlaris (or, if they be realh' from Galapago.s, another Sphærcchimis-s^e^ci&siaiistraliæ'})). Oii 



the back of the label is written acheté a Londres * — thus tlie locality cannot be regarded as reliable. 



ParacoifrotHs Gaimardi (p. 124). On a specimeii of this species in the museum of Paris (the 



type specimen of Ech. aciculatus Hupé, which is a synou\m of Gaimardi) I have fouiid a small triden- 



tate pedicellaria; it was somewhat broken, but showed nevertheless sufficienth- that it is similar to 



those of P. lividus, so that a specific character is scarcely to be fouud in it. 



Anthocidaris Iioiialostonin (p. 125). The type specimens of Ecli. hoinalostoinaX^X. are two naked 



tests that are really ver)- similar \.o Anthocidaris; but it cannot be decided b>- the naked tests whether 



they are the same species. The localit\- (New Zealand) tells against the identit>-. I have above (loc. 



cit.) said that the name of Iwmalostoma would have to be used whether the}- be identical or not. 



According to the opinion of Doderlein expressed to me, this is incorrect, and I shall readily subuiit 



to his authorit>-. Then the species will get the name of Anthocidaris crassispina (Ag.). 



Strongyloceiitrotus uudiis (pp. 126, 140). A specimen of this species (from Hakodadi — Japan) 



I have examined in Strassburg. No globiferous pedicellariæ were found on it, but the spicules show 



it to be a genuine Strongyloceiitrotus. The tridentate pedicellariæ occur in three different form.s, as 



in drobachiensis; a sliort, broad one (i'S""") resembling that figured on PI. XX. Fig. 20; a long, narrow 



one (2™") resembhng that figured on PI. XX. Fig. 6, only more serrate below; and finally a small one 



(ca. 0-5'"'"), more particularly corrcsponding to the third form in drobacliicnsis (PI. XX. Fig. 4); it is simply 



leaf-shaped with quite straight edge, without marked indentations. The other pedicellariæ .show no 



peculiarities. 



Strongylocentrotus mcxicanus (pp. 126, 140). The specimens from Chili mentioned by Sluiter 



(371), are Echinometrids ^ but whether they be realh- Str. mexicanus, is perhaps not quite sure, so 



the systematic position of this species must continue to be regarded as doubtful. 



Ec/iimis elcgans (p. 145). The specimens from Cape Verd (Gazelle ) noted by Studer as Ech. 



elegansf., are two small naked tests; one is doubtless Geiiocidaris iiiacidata^ the other I suppose to be 



a Parechinus, but it cannot be decided with certainty. 



Echinus afjinis (p. 152). For this species I eau add one niore locality, having fouud in the 



museiun of Paris some .specimens from 39" 38' N. L. 70°56'W. L. 1241 fathoms ( Blake ); they were 



called Ech. norvegicus. 



Echinus acutus, var. norvegicus (p. 155). Some small specimens from the Faroe Channel 



((.Michael Sars 150—217 fathoms. Ad. S. Jensen) have a prinuary tubercle on all the ambulacral piates 



and upon the whole in regular series; they are only irregular as to size, especially a few ones at the 



ambitus being disproportionately large. Upon the whole the ambulacral areas have here quite the 



same appearance as in some specimens of Ech. a/finis. They are then to be distinguished from this 



species by the colour and the globiferous pedicellariæ, the latter having in affinis 2—2 (more rarely 



2—3) lateral teeth, while in norvegicus the\- have i — i or 1 — 2 lateral teeth. The tridentate pedicellariæ 



of the two species are so similar, that no distinguishing character eau be found in this feature. On 



the other band the spicules of the stalk of the pedicellariæ is a good character of norvegicus — when 



they are found, but they are no constant feature. — Evidenth- Ech. affinis is more particularly allied 



23* 



