ECHINOIDEA. II. 



139 



The differences pointed out here: in the shape of the test, the form and size of the internal 

 fasciole, the peristome, the petals, the pores inchided by the subanal fasciole, the tuberculation and 

 the pedicellariæ seem to nie to leave no doubt that the Cape specimens hitherto referred to Ech. fla- 

 vesccns make a well characterized species, certainly nearly related to flavescens, but easily distinguished 

 from this species. The differences in the shape of the test and the form of the peristome, to be sure, 

 do not appear very clearly from the measurements given below of capcnsc and some equal-sized 

 specimens oi flavescens; these characters also are probably rather variable, but in connection with the 

 other differences they get some valne. The difference in the size of the internal fasciole is very clearly 

 seen in these measurements. It will be remarked that the measurements of the fasciole in flavescens 

 are not quite in accordance with those given by Koehler (Echinocard. de la Méditerr. p. 182); this 

 may be due perhaps to these measurements being taken from the interior horders of the fasciole or 

 to the specimens from the Mediterranean having upon the whole the internal fasciole somewhat 

 smaller than the specimens from the northern seas. Nevertheless the measurements given by Koehler 

 also show the fasciole to be distinctly larger than in capcnse. 



Echinocardium capense. 



Echinocardium flavescens. 



* The fasciole is measured from the outer horders of the fasciole, the length of the peristome is taken from the 

 point of the labrum. All the measurements are in mm. 



31. Echinocardium pennatifidum Norman. 



PI. II. Figs. 3, 7, 9, 13, 15, 17. PI. XVI. Fig. iS. PI. XVII. Figs. i, iS, 20, 24—26, 2S— 29, 32—33, 42, 44. 



Literature: Barrett: On two species of Echinodermata new to the Fauna of Great Britain. 

 Ann. Nat. Hist. 2. Ser. XIX. 1857. p. 33. PL VII. Fig. 2. a— c. ['iAmphidofus gibbos7is-i> Ag.). — A. M. Nor- 

 man: Last Report on Dredging among the Shetland Islands. Rep. Brit. Assoc. 1868. p- 315. — Hodge: 

 Catalogue of the Echinodermata of Northumberland and Durham. Nat. Hist. Transact. Northumberl. 

 and Durham. IV. 1872. p. 142. PI. V. Figs. 1—5. — Agassiz: Revision of Echini. p. iii, 351. PI. XX. 

 Figs. I — 2(?) — F. Jeffr. Bell: On a species of Echinocardium from the Channel Islands. Ann. Nat. 

 Hist. 5 Ser. XVII. 1886. p. 516 — 17. Catalogue Brit. Echinoderms. p. 170. PL XVI. Fig. 5. — Hoyle: 



Revised List Brit. Echinoidea. p. 428. — Koehler: Échinides et Ophiures de l'.iHirondelle ■ (229). 



Monaco. Fase. XII. 1898. p. 24. PL III. Fig. 7, IV. F'igs. 9 — 11. VIII. Figs. 40 — 42. Sur la présence en 

 Méditerranée de l'Asterias rubens et de rEchinocardium pennatifidum Norm. Zool. xA.nz. XXI. 1898. 

 p. 471 — 4. Sur les Echinocardium de la Méditerranée (231). PL 4. Fig. 15. — Stanley W. Kemp: 

 Echinoderms of Ballynakill and Bofin Harbonrs, Co. Galway, and of the Deep Water off the West 

 Coast of Ireland. Ann. Rep. Fish. Ireland. 1902 — 03. Pt. IL App. VI (1905). p. 199. 



18* 



