26 BULLETIN 100, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM 
Recalling that Déderlein found the primordial plate of this species 
to be divided into three parts lying in a vertical median series, as In 
the remarkable Triassic Tiarechinus, I must mention that in the one 
interambulacral area of the present specimen that has been denuded 
I find this plate undivided. The extraordinary fact that there are 
no genital pores in this specimen would seem to indicate that the 
genital pores are closed up after the shedding of the genital products. 
The idea that it might be a young individual with the genital pores 
not yet formed is opposed by the fact that genital pores are indicated 
as existing in the other smaller specimens known. But more exten- 
sive material is very much needed for settling this point. 
Genus COELOPLEURUS L. Agassiz 
COELGPLEURUS MACULATUS A. Agassiz and H. L. Clark 
Coelopleurus maculatus A. AGAssiz and H. L. CrarK, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., 
vol. 51, p. 116, 1907; Hawaiian and other Pacific Echini, Salenidae, ete., 
p. 84, pl. 49, figs. 21-28; pl. 53, figs. 1-7; pl. 57, figs. 4-6, 1908.—MortTENSEN, 
Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 2, p. 631, pl. 67, fig. 4; pl. 68, figs. 1-3; 
pl. 69, figs. 10-16; pl. 88, figs. 26-29, 1935. 
Localities Station 5217; between Burias and Luzon; Anima Sola 
Island bearing N. 42° W., 17.3 miles distant (lat. 13°20’00’’ N., long. 
123°14’15’’ E.); 192 meters; bottom temperature 17.28° C.; coarse 
gray sand; April 22, 1908. One specimen. 
Station 5415; between Cebu and Bohol; Lauis Point Light bearing 
N. 24° W., 7.2 miles distant (lat. 10°07’50’’ N., long. 123°57’00’’ E.) ; 
161 meters; bottom temperature 16.89° C.; fine sand; March 24, 1909. 
Two specimens. 
Station 5617; Dodinga Bay, Gillolo; Ternate Island (SE.) bearing 
S. 45° W., 7 miles distant (lat. 0°49’30’’ N., long. 127°25’30’" E.) ; 
239 meters; coral; November 27, 1909. One specimen. 
Remarks.—In his “Catalogue of the Recent Sea-Urchins of the 
British Museum,” published in 1925, on page 73, Dr. H. L. Clark comes 
to the conclusion that Coelopleurus maculatus is identical with 
C. elegans (Bell). JI cannot agree with this. The valves of the 
ophicephalous pediceliariae of C. elegans are conspicuously different 
from those of C. maculatus, and since the ophicephalous pedicellariae 
within the genus Coelopleurus afford important specific differences, 
the character of the ophicephalous pedicellariae alone forbids regard- 
ing elegans and maculatus as identical. It appears also that C. ele- 
gans has none of the club-shaped secondary spines cn the aboral 
side so characteristic of C. maculatus. On the whole it is clear that 
C. elegans stands much nearer to C. maillardi than to C. maculatus, 
and it is quite probable even that it is identical with C. maillardi, 
of which the name e/egans would then be simply a synonym. 
