2 * T. GiSLÈN, 



roughly worked out systematical method. Thus I have for each spe- 

 cies giv^en a more or less detailed (Inscription of a typical specimen 

 and foi' the rest of Iho individuals belonging to the same type I have 

 given an account of the divergences from the normal type. 1 have 

 also given numerical specifications for such characteristics as were the 

 subject of statistical treatment. 



What I have often felt as a deficiency is, that the authors of 

 the species-descriptions within this group, especially during the last 

 few years, have not given any specifications either as to which cha- 

 racteristics they have considered to be significant for the species or 

 to which previously described species the newly described type 

 might be most closely related. It has therefore become unnecessarily 

 tedious to find out from the multitude of the stated characters those 

 which are specific for the species. Because of this I have added to the 

 description of every new species or variety a short summary and dis- 

 cussion of the characteristics that 1 have thought to be distinguishing 

 ones for the species, and a slatement as to which previously described 

 species the new one might be most closely related to. 



Since the days of the Challenger papers there arc few works 

 that have given any figures of the newly described Crinoids and in 

 the cases where this has been done it is almost without exception 

 only habitus-figures that have been reproduced as drawings or photos. 

 When it is necessary to reproduce a habifus-picture of a Crinoid a 

 photo is doubtlessly most suitable, n. b. if well taken. A picture of 

 an entire animal must always involve great sehematization, which be- 

 comes more visible in Crinoids than in other animals because the 

 Crinoids consist of such an innumerable quantity of ossicles, the num- 

 ber, sculpture and form of which represent the proper genus and spe- 

 cies characteristics. A good photo, on the contrary, can quite cor- 

 rectly reproduce a habitus-picture and, in addition, a good many of the 

 more microscopical characters. But when it is a question of giving a 

 complete picture of a newly described species the macroscopical photo 

 is, however, not satisfactory alone, at least not in the case of a Coma- 

 tulid species. Then one must also add to the habitus-picture drawings 

 (or microphotos) to visualize the specific characters for the species, 

 which one usually takes from the appearance, form, number and size 

 of the Cd and cirrals; from the sculpture of the arms and especially 



