ANNOTATED LIST. 107 
guishable from specimens of the same size from Europe or the United States. The species 
was not previously known from the Torres Strait region, but it is known from New Zealand 
and the Kermadecs. Its occurrence at Mer makes one more than ever suspicious of the 
validity of A. australiensis, which I (1909a) described some years ago from the coast of 
New South Wales. There is certainly room for grave doubts in regard to the validity of 
several nominal species closely allied to squamata, and a critical study of the group needs 
to be made. The specimens found at Mer were discovered under rocks on both the south- 
eastern and southwestern reef-flats. In one case the brittle-star was on the underside of 
the rock and in another it was on the back of an Ophiocoma! The latter position was 
probably accidental, perhaps the result of the currents caused by the overturn of the rock. 
Ampbhiodia brocki. 
Amphiura brocki Déderlein. 1896. Jena. Denkschr., 8, p. 286, pl. xv, figs. 6, 6a. 
Amphiodia brocki H. L. Clark. 1915. Mem. M. C. Z., 25, p. 249. 
The two specimens on which this species is based were taken by Semon, and, like all his 
Torres Strait material, were labeled simply ‘‘ Thursday Island,” but the exact locality where 
they were taken is not known. We found no specimens which could be considered conspecific. 
Amphiodia mesopoma. 
H. L. Clark. 1915. Mem. M. C. Z., 25, p. 247, pl. 6, figs. 11, 13 (not 12 and 14) —1918. Bull. M. C. Z., 62, 
p. 287, pl. 3, fig. 7. 
This is one of the few echinoderms which occur in Torres Strait and also on the south- 
ern coast of Australia. Of course, it may be found to have, like Lwidia maculata, not only 
a circumaustralian distribution but a northward range throughout the East Indies. Cer- 
tainly the East Indian species, ochroleuca, is nearly related. The only Torres Strait speci- 
men of mesopoma which I have seen was taken from under a rock in a few feet of water 
near shore on the east coast of Badu, November 1, 1918, by my fellow collector, Mr. Frank 
A. Potts. It is the holotype of the species. My friend Mr. J. Gabriel, of Melbourne, 
has found what seems to be the same species not uncommon near Westernport, Victoria. 
Amphioplus parviclypeus. 
H. L. Clark. 1915. Mem. M. C. Z., 25, p. 255, pl. 7, figs. 5-8. 
The holotype of this well-marked species is unique. It was taken on the underside 
of a coral fragment in 5 to 6 feet of water, at Badu, November 1, 1913, by Mr. 
Frank A. Potts. 
Amphioplus relictus. 
Ophiophragmus afinis Duncan. 1887. Jour. Linn. Soc. Zool., 21, p. 89, pl. viii, figs. 4-6 (not Amphiura affinis 
Studer, 1885, which is also an Amphioplus). 
Amphiura relicta Koehler. 1898. Bull. Sci., 31, p. 68, pl. iv, figs. 37, 38. 
Amphioplus relictus H. L. Clark. 1915. Mem. M. C. Z., 25, p. 256. 
A single very small specimen of an Amphioplus, 2 mm. across the disk, was dredged 
by us off Goode Island, Torres Strait, in 2 to 3 fathoms on September 13, 1913. So far 
as can be determined from so young an individual, it seems to belong to this Indian species. 
Duncan’s specimens were from the Mergui Archipelago, while Koehler’s were from the 
Andaman Islands and the Ganjam coast. But the Siboga found the species common at a 
number of widely separated stations in the East Indies, and its occurrence in Torres Strait 
is not at all improbable. 
Ophiactis delicata. 
H. L. Clark. 1915. Mem. M. C. Z., 24, p. 260, pl. 11, figs. 9, 10. 
It is rather curious that the unique holotype of this species was found on a comatulid 
(Comanthus annulatum) when it was taken from the sea and placed in a bucket. It is prob- 
