PARECHINL'S. 273 



oculars exsert (as in Psammechinus) and 30 per cent have ocular I insert, in 

 magellanicus, the buccal membrane of which is thin and naked, only 3 per cent 

 have all the oculars exsert and 88 have I insert. Few specimens of annulalus 

 have been examined and they resemble young angulosus in having the oculars 

 all exsert as a rule, with ocular I not rarely insert. Of Hutloni too few specimens 

 are known to make deductions of any value. Benham, in his description of the 

 species, says that the oculars are all exsert but in the specimen, which he kindly 

 sent the Museum, ocular I is broadly insert. Unfortunately he says nothing 

 as to the character of the buccal membrane, but as he first placed the species 

 in Mortensen's genus Pseudechinus, it is fair to infer that Huttoni agrees with 

 magellanicus in that particular; in the M. C. Z. specimen the buccal membrane 

 is wanting. 



Although the species of Parechinus are all southern, their geographical 

 distribution is unknown. New Zealand and Australian material is infrequent 

 in most museums, and such specimens as have been accessible are lacking in 

 some important particulars; either the locality labels are open to suspicion, or 

 the tests are bare and usually lack the buccal membrane as well as all spines 

 and pedicellarise ; they often lack the abactinal system also. With the exception 

 of bare tests not a single specimen of this family has been seen (save Eve- 

 chinus and Tripneustes) from any definite locality in either Austraha or New 

 Zealand, and in every case of a bare test where the label reads ''Australia" there 

 is reason for suspecting its correctness. I agree with Mortensen that angulosus is 

 not certainly known from any place except South Africa, but we have unquestion- 

 able specimens labelled "Red Sea," "Austraha," "Hakodate, Japan," and 

 "Nicobar Islands." The last is of the same lot apparently as the one in the 

 Copenhagen Museum, as it was received by the M. C. Z. from the Vienna 

 Museum. The specimens recorded by Benham (1909, Rec. Canterbury ]\lus., I, 

 no. 2, p. 25) from New Zealand as angulosus seem to be magellanicus. This 

 opinion, which was originally based on the pubhshed description, has since been 

 confirmed by Dr. Benham's kind sending of one of the Stewart Island specimens. 

 There is Httle reason to doubt that Filhol's margariiaceus {auct. Perrier), said to 

 be common on Stewart Island and in Cook Strait is magellanicus. This species 

 is quite variable and Doderlein (1906) has suggested names for two varieties, 

 Hassleri from Eastern Patagonia and novce-amsicrdamice from New Amsterdam 

 Island. The latter is a well-marked variety, characterized by the very small 

 abactinal system and the stout greenish spines. Having received a specimen 

 from Dr. Doderlein, and compared it with a large series of specimens from southern 



