CLAKK: AUSTRALIAN AND INDO-PACIFIC ECHINODEKMS. 119 



Pectinura fallax. 

 Opkiopeza fallax Peters, 1851. Monatsb. Kon. Ak. Berlin, p. 465. 



Querimba and Zanzibar, East Africa ; Madagascar ; Amboiua ; " Great Ocean." 

 Littoral. 



Of eight specimens from Zanzibar iu the M. C Z. collection, one has six arms ; 

 another has a supplementary oral plate; another has two such plates; the re- 

 mainder have none. 



Pectinura yoldii. 



Ophiopeza yoldii Liitken, 1856. Vid. Med., p. 9. 

 Ophiopsammus yoldii Liitken, 1869. Add. Hist. Oph., 3, p. 37. 

 Ophiopeza conjungens Bell, 1884. " Alert " Kept., p. 137. 



New South Wales ; Queensland ; Thursday Island, Torres Strait ; off Sum- 

 bawa and Waigiou, D. E. I. ; " Indian Ocean ; " Pandanoa, Philippines; Sumatra. 

 Littoral to 120 (385 ?) fms. 



As the M. C Z. collection contains a specimen of P. yoldii identified by 

 Lyman after examination of the type at Copenhagen, and a specimen of P. con- 

 jungens from Port MoUe, Queensland, identified by Bell, I have been able to 

 satisfy myself that the two names refer to the same species. The form and 

 relative lengths of the arm-spines are very characteristic, while their number 

 varies from 5 to 10 according to the size of the specimen ; an adult specimen 

 (disc diameter about 12 mm.) will have 7 or 8 arm-spines on most of the basal 

 joints. Verrill (1899, Trans. Conn. Acad. 10, p. 373) gives P. yoldii as occur- 

 ring in shallow water in the West Indian region. I have been unable to find 

 any record of this species having been taken anywhere in the vrestern hemi- 

 sphere. I presume, therefore, that VerriU's statement rests on Liitkeu's original 

 record ; but Liitken does not say that the type-specimen was from the West 

 Indies ; he simply says that it was probably West Indian, though the locality 

 on the label (Antillerne) he admits is hypothetical. 



Ophiopezella. 



Ljungman, 1872. Ofv. Kongl. Vet.-Ak. Forh., 28, p. 639. 

 Type 0. spinosa {Ophiarachna) Ljungman, 1867. Ofv. Kongl. Vet.-Ak. Forh., 23, 

 p. 305. Monotypic at the time. 



This genus failed to meet with Lyman's approval, but it has been revived by 

 de Loriol (1893, Rev. Suisse de Zool., 1, p. 392 ; pi. 13, figs. 1-le) and really 

 seems entitled to recognition. Ljungman does not designate any type but says 

 the genus is equivalent to " Ophiopeza Ltk., non Peters, Ttec Lym. ; Ophiarachna 

 Ljn. ex parte." But " Ophiopeza Ltk." (Add. Hist. Oph., 3, p. 35) was based 

 on two specimens of an ophiuran from Fiji which Liitken considered identical with 

 Ophiopeza fallax Peters and also with Ophiarachna spinosa- liinngman. Ljung- 

 man recognized from Liilken's account that the specimens were not 0. fallax, but 



