-22- 



i different no e sUali- see late*. The animal studied in this 

 respect *as about 50 on in diameter, with, aooording to Verrill*s 

 estimate about 22,000 tube feet, each of whioh was extremely 

 aq tire. In water the animal weired only 50 g. but in air the 

 weight was estimated to be well over 1000 g. Suoh a starfish 

 when set to pulling against the recording lever pulled 54, 45, 

 30,60 g* jin four trials ( on different days). The time relations 

 were similar to those of ftetorinals pulling reaction (less than 

 half an hour of inoreasing tension and up to two hours of 

 declining tension), 



The remarlcable faot that this large and active starfish should 

 not pull marly as hard as an 8 om ftstarina. or less than one fourth 

 as hard as a 12 am Pj.sa.ster. wae thought perhaps to be due to 

 failure of the attaching reaction during the step-reflex, to keep 

 the same relationship with the resistance to the step (pull) for 

 these higher values, whioh it has shown according to the above 

 table for lower levels* Some tube feet were seen to slip on 

 the glass as they performed the step reflex* Other tube feet 

 were seen to be in the*refraotory state* that is to be attached 

 tightly and to be showing no sign of the step reflex. This made 

 it impossible to get direct evidence as to the status of the 

 attaching reflex in the looomotor tube feet, as the "refractory" 

 tube feet caused the release to be abnormally high* 



Besides direct observation of slipping tube feet, indirect 

 evidence that the lacfc of pull was due to failure of the 

 attaching reflex in the active tube feet, was furnished by Wti/wcj 

 *bala*iittg" the animal with 80 ga (weight under water) of Syracuse 

 dishes placed on its dorsal side. When so weighted down, the value 

 of the 54 g. pull was increased to 69 g. and the value of the 



60 gtt pull was increased to 75 The increased pulling ability 

 was undoubtedly due to increased friction between the tube feet 



