ECHNIOIDEA. II. 



133 



Éch. p. 12. — Diiben & Koreii: Skandinaviens Echinod. p. 283. Tab. X. 50. — M. Sars: Beskrivelser 

 og Iagttagelser. 1S35. p. 46. PI. IX. 23. Norges Echinod. p. 98. — Gray: Catal. Rec. Echinida. p. 43. — 



Perrier: Rech. sur les pédicellaires. p. 175. PI. VII. 2. a.— f. — Th. Barrois: Echinod Acores (30). 



p. 12. Catal. Ech. Concarnean (29). p. 46. — Bolan: Spat. Hamburger Mus. (82). p. 10. — A. Agassiz: 

 Revision of Echini. p. iio, 351. PI. XX. 3— 4. XXV. 26. — Loven: Etudes sur les Éch. PI. III. 33— 37. 

 On Pourtalesia. PL XI. 127— 30. PL XV, XVII. — Ludwig: Echinodermen d. Mittelm. p. 561. — Bell: 

 Catalogue Brit. Echinoderms. p. 171. PL XVI. 6— 7. — Hoyle: Revised List Brit. Echinoidea. p. 428. 



— Koehler: Recherches s. les Échinides de Provence, p. 129. PL VII. 57, 59— 60. Sur les Echinocar- 

 dium de la Méditerranée (231). p. 180. PL IV. 5 — 13. — Grieg: Overs, nordlige Norges Echinod. 13.34. — 

 Doderlein: Arktische Seeigel. Fauna Arctica. p. 384. Echinoiden d. deutschen Tiefsee-Exped. p. 268. 



Non.: A. Agassiz: «Challenger s -Echinoidea. P- 175. — Bell: Echinoidea. South Africa. p. 174. 



— G as CO : Descrizioue Ech. nuovi (159). p. 6. Fig. 3. 



For other literary references see: « Revision of Echini , Bell: Catalogue Brit. Ech., Ludwig: 

 Echinod. d. ]\Iittelmeeres, and Koehler: Sur les Echinocardium de la Méditerranée. 



This species has been so very often described and figured that little new can be added, espe- 

 cialh' after the elaborate comparative study of the European species of the genus Echinocardium given 

 by Koehler. Some few remarks, however, may be made, and especially the pedicellariæ of this and 

 the other species need a closer examination than has hitherto been made of them. 



Eminently characteristic of this species are, as pointed out by Koehler, the large tubercles 

 outside the fasciole, along the anterior ambulacrum and in the lateral interambulacra. Koehler finds 

 these tubercles more numerous in the small than in the larger specimens. This is not in accordauce 

 with my observations. In a small specimen of 8-5™'" length I find only a few larger tubercles in the 

 anterior interambulacra; in a specimen of 10'"" length there is also a single large tubercle in the 

 posterior interambulacrum. A specimen of 15™"" length has, besides several large tubercles in the ante- 

 rior and in the odd posterior interambulacrum, a single large tubercle in the lett lateral interambula- 

 crum, just behind the left anterior petal. Later on more large tubercles appear, especially along the 

 posterior edge of the anterior ^Detals, large specimens having here generally several close-set large 

 tubercles, besides more or fewer spread on the ujDper piates of these Interambulacra. I have seen no 

 specimens agreeing with that figured in PL 4. Fig. 10 by Koehler (Echinocard. de la Méditerranée), 

 and the suggestion that this figure represents, really, another species, seems not quite unfounded. 

 (Comp. below, p. 143 — 4.) 



The labrum reaches the anterior end of the second adjoiuing ambulacral piates; sometimes it 

 reaches to the middle of these piates, but generally their anterior, inner corner is produced to meet 

 the labrum. In young specimens (comp. PL XV. Fig. 172 in Lovén's «0n Pourtalesia*) it does 

 not reach beyond the first ambulacral plate; in a specimen of 8-5™™ I find it still reaching only to 

 the end of the first ambulacral plate. — The anterior edge of the labrum is straighter than in 

 the other species, (except pcnnatifidum) as pointed out by Agassiz (< Rev. of Ech. > p. 351). — The 

 number of pores included by the subanal fasciole is, as stated by Bell, one or two pairs, both cases 

 occurring almost equally frequently. In one case I have found the first ambulacral plate reaching 



