260 Miscellaneous. 



ment of the starfishes, the important question of the synonymy has 

 engaged all ray attention ; and in this also I have had to make many 

 rectifications. The direct comparison of the types of Lamarck, 

 Midler and Troschel, Duehassaing, and MicheKn with Gray's types, 

 which were studied in London, and those which Dr. Liitken was 

 kind enough to send to me, the examination of the specimens recently 

 brought from New Zealand by M. Filhol, and which have been iden- 

 tified with Capt. Hutton's types, and the study of the specimens 

 ticketed by vaiious American Museums which I found in London 

 and Paris, and in the collection of M. Cotteau at Auxerre, have led 

 me to the following conclusions. 



Asterias striata, Lam., which every one, on the faith of Miiller 

 and Troschel, regarded as an Asteracanthion, does not even belong 

 to the family Asteriadge, of which that genus forms part, and must 

 constitute a distinct genus of the Echinasterida3( VaJvastey. gen. nov.). 

 Asterias calamaria, Gray, and Coscinasterias muricata, Verrill, are 

 identical. Asterias ecliinophora, A. clavigera, and A. exigiui of 

 Lamarck have been described under new names, which must be sup- 

 pressed. Ophidiaster Leachii, Gray, and Leiaster coriaceus, Peters, 

 are identical. This is also the case with 0. pyramidatus, Gray, and 

 0. porosissimus, Liitken ; 0. cylindricus, Lam., and 0. aspierulus, 

 Liitk. ; 0. pusiUus, Miill. & Tr., and 0. granifer, Liitk. ; LincTcia 

 pacijica, Gray, and L. nicobarica, Liitk. ; Asterina minuta, Gray, and 

 A. folium, Liitk. ; A. p)entagonus, Miill. &Tr., and ^. Krausii, Gray; 

 and Astropeden articulatus, Say, and A. duhiv.s, Gray. 



Asterop>sis pidvillus and A. ctenacantha of Miiller and Troschel are 

 only the same species in diff'erent states of preservation. We must also 

 regard as identical : — 1. Lmckia Oaildingii, Gray, Scytaster stella, 

 Duch., and Linckia ornithojnis, Yal. ; 2. Gonwphia cegypfiaca, Gray, 

 Scytaster zodiacaJis, Miill. & Tr., and Oreaster Desjardinsii, Mich, ; 

 3. Astropecten armatus, Miill. & Tr., A. polyacanthus, Miill. & Tr., 

 A. liystrix, Val., and A. Wappa, Val. ; 4. A. armatus, Gray, A. 

 erinace^is, Gray, and A. Q^rstedii, Liitk. ; 5. A. dvplicatus, Gray, A. 

 Valenciennii, Miill. & Tr., and A. variabilis, Liitk. ; 6. Asteriscus 

 mimdiis, Miill. & Tr., A. marginatus, Val., and A.stellifera, Mobius. 

 On the other hand, Dr. Liitken believed that Asterias canariensis, 

 D'Orb., was identical with Chataster longipes, Retz..; but it is cer- 

 tainly a distinct species, which, indeed, is Narcissia teneriffce of Gray, 

 It is also in error that Yon Martens refers Astropecten mauritimius, 

 Gray, to Archaster angidatus, Miill. & Tr. Gray's species is certainly 

 an Astropecten allied to A. scoparius, Val. Nectria oceUifera, Gray, 

 is not the same as A. oceUifera, Lam. ; Astrogonium attstrale, Miill. 

 & Tr., is not, as authors have supposed, the Tosia austraJis of Gray, 

 but his Tosia aurata ; and it is A. geometricum, Miill. & Tr., that 

 represents Tosia austrahs. The Asteriscus iignxed by Savigny is not, 

 as stated, A. verrucidatus, Mull, it Tr., but A. ceplieus, Val., which 

 itself appears to be the true A. Burtonii, Gray. The remarkable 

 animal described l)y Hutton under the name of Ptcraster injlatus is 

 not a Ptcraster, but a Pcdmipcs. A. obtusangula. Lam., has been 

 wrongly referred by Miiller and Troschel to Oreaster ; I retain for it 

 the name of Goniaster. Oymnasterias inermis, Gray, is only a 



