studios on innriin' (IslrMcnds 40') 



The distal parts of the baleen bristles are drawn l)v (t. \V. MtJLLER differenth- I'loiu the 

 type described and reproduced l>y nie for the genus as a whole; cf. fig. 14 of A. Grinialdi. 

 (t. W. Mf'l.l.Kii's drawing, 1894, pi. 5, fig. 15 a, is made from A. teres. An examination of a 

 specimen of this form showed it to have the type described by me; on account of this I have 

 assumed that G. W. MUller has made a mistake on this point as well and have consequently 

 made no reservation in this character for this form in the genus diagnosis given above. 



As is pointed out in the description of the genus given above, the large lateral bristle ''''/''' '""''• 

 on the comb of the fiftli limb extends with its point somewhat beyond the anterior end of the 

 coiiib in all the forms investigated by me. G. W. MtiLLER draws this bristle (1894) in A. ohlonga 

 as not inconsiderably shorter relatively, pi. 4, fig. 50; in another figure of the same species, 

 pi. 4, fig. 49, this bristle is reproduced with the same relative length as I observed in the species 

 investigated by me. On examining a specimen from the Gulf of Naples, identified by 

 G. W. MtiLLER as A. ohlonga, the same condition was observed as in pi. 4, fig. 49; because of 

 this I considered it probable that fig. 50 is incorrectly drawn in this character and have therefore 

 made no reservation for this species in the above genus description. 



In the key that G. W. MtiLLER set up for this genus, 1912, p. 43 we find in no. 5 the following FKrcn. 



statement: ..Am 1. und 2. Furcaldorne finden sich zwischen den dicht stehenden kurzen Spitzen 

 langere Borsten in geringerer Anzahl (5 resp. 3)." This character would distinguish only a single 

 species, A. quadrata G. S. Brady. This is certainly a mistake on the part of this writer, as these 

 ,, longer bristles" are undoubtedly no specific character for this species; on the contrary they are 

 certainly identical with the long ventral spines that are shown in the above description of the genus 

 to be characteristic of the females of all the species of this genus that were investigated by me. Similar 

 long spines have, as a matter of fact, been reproduced by G. W. MOLler himself; cf. 1894, pi. 5, fig. 23. 



The genus Asterofe, in the sense that it is taken in the present work, seems to be a very ('ias-sifia,ii„n 

 natural systematic unit. "' ' ''"'''"'"'■ 



Is an additional division of this genus possible and proper? 



A number of the species described by me below may fairly naturally be arranged in 

 smaller and presumably natural groups, and some occupy a more or less isolated position. It 

 seems to me, however, rather inconvenient to look upon these groups as special sub-genera, 

 first because we are concerned with rather small differences and secondly because, in my opinion, 

 these groups wiU probably prove to be very difficult or even quite impossible to distinguish 

 when in the future the number of well investigated and described species is increased. So far 

 I have distinguished three groups, which I shall subsequently call: 



1) the Quinquesetae group 



2) „ Mullen 



3) ,, Grimaldi „ 



With reference to the descriptions of the species given l)elow I shall give a brief account 

 here of the characters that distinguish these groups: 



Quinquesetae group: 



Female: — Shell: — Seen from the side this is somewhat oblong, more or less 

 weakly pear-shaped, with the posterior part rather slightly larger than the anterior part. 



ZuoloK. bidrag, Uppsala. Suppl.-Bd. 1. '*■' 



