26 Prof. F. J. Bell on the Names or Existence of 
Medd. 1859 [1860], p. 57) described Asteriscus brasiliensis, 
and in a footnote at the end of his memoir identified his with 
Mébius’s species. 
The synonymy of this species should therefore run as 
follows :— 
Asterina stellifer. 
Asteriscus minutus, M. & Tr. Syst. Ast. (1842), p. 41 (not Gray, 
1840). S 
Asteriscus stellifer, Mobius, Abh, Geb, Naturw. Hamburg, iv. 2 (1859), 
p. 4; Verrill, Trans. Conn. Acad. i. (“1867”), p. 348. 
Asteriscus brasiliensis, Liitken, Vid. Medd. 1859 (1860), p. 57. 
Asteriscus marginatus, Val. MSS.; Hupé, n. n.; Perrier, Ann. Sci. 
nat. xii. (1869), p. 289. 
Asterina stellifera, Liitken, Vid. Medd. 1871, p. 301. 
Asterina marginata, Perrier, Arch. zool. exp. v. (1876), p. 211; Slad. 
Chall. Rep., Ast. (1889), p. 774. 
Goniodiscus articulatus. 
My. Sladen (Chall. Rep. Ast. p. 754) writes “G. articulatus 
(Linné), de Loriol,” meaning, I believe, by this formula that 
Linneus named this species and de Loriol put it in the genus 
Gontodiscus ; and on his principles—those of a writer who 
accepts pre-Linnean quasispecific or distinctly nonspecific 
names as specific appellations—he is quite right. 
M. de Loriol (Ree. Zool. Suiss. i. p. 638) writes “Gonio- 
discus articulatus (Linné), Liitken;” this collocation of 
words must mean something different from Mr. Sladen’s, as 
Dr. Liitken put the species in the genus Gondaster; and I 
take it to mean Linneus before the tenth edition of the 
‘Systema Nature’ named this species, and Liitken revived 
the name. 
I do not see on what grounds we are to associate Linnzeus’s 
name with this species: in the tenth and twelfth editions of 
the ‘Systema Nature’ it is included under A. aranciaca, and 
it is to Liitken that the credit is due of distinguishing the 
form and reviving the name. 
The ‘Museum Tessinianum,’ in which A. articulata is 
described and figured, bears date 1753, or is anterior to the 
tenth edition by five years *; it is said by well-qualified 
bibliographers (see Cat. Libr. Mus. Pract. Geol.) that the 
work was published privately, though Count Tessin’s preface 
hardly supports this view. 
If we accept 1758 as the year from which to start we must 
* 1758, the zoological ab urbe condita of binominal chronology,” 
Loyén, Echinoid. Linn. (1887), p. 50. 
