ECHINOLAMPAS. Ill 



Echinolampas. 



Gray, 1825. Ann. Phil., 26, p. 429. 



Type, Echinanthus ovatus Leske, 1778. Add. ad Klein, p. 127. 



This is the only genus of the family which has a sufficient representation 

 in the seas of today to make it well known. There are numerous Fossil forms 

 and at least eight Recent forms have been named besides three species of Palaeo- 

 lampas which seem properly congeneric. 



Nothing has been published hitherto concerning the pedicellariae of the 

 genus except by A. Agassiz and de Meijere. Mr. Agassiz gives (1881. Chal- 

 lenger, Ech., pi. 43, figs. 3-5) two figures of ophicephalous pedicellariae and 

 one of the head of a tridentate of Echinolampas oviformis (= E. ovata) but 

 there is no detailed description. De Meijere gives (1904, Siboga Ech., pi. 19, 

 figs. 381-383) some sketches of tridentate and triphyllous valves, from speci- 

 mens of Echinolampas taken by the Siboga near Saleyer, D. E. I., which he 

 identified as depressa. While satisfied that his specimens are not the West 

 Indian depressa, I am not sure what they are; it is quite probable that they 

 represent an undescribed species. I have examined the pedicellariae of five 

 species but in only one is there a strikingly characteristic form. The three 

 kinds, tridentate, ophicephalous, and triphyllous, are very generally present but 

 in some species one or two kinds may be lacking. The triphyllous are of course 

 the most easily overlooked because of their minute size. The tridentate may 

 occur in two quite different forms, one with narrow, the other with wider blades. 

 The miliary spines are a little swollen at the tip, and are usually smooth but in 

 sternopetala are distinctly prickly. 



The species of Echinolampas are very hard to distinguish from each other, 

 and as a result there is much confusion about the Recent forms. The species 

 longest and best known was described by Leske as Echinanthus ovatus. Gmelin 

 changed the specific name to oviformis and this change was accepted by Lam- 

 arck, Gray, Agassiz, and later writers. There seems to be no good reason, 

 however, why ovatus should not be restored to its proper usage, as Doderlein 

 suggested in 1906. In 1837 Desmoulins described a new living species from 

 West Africa as E. richardi. Mr. Agassiz replaced this name by hellei on the 

 ground that richardi Desmoulins was not the same as richardi Desmarest. But 

 Desmarest's name has no validity and even if it had, richardi Desmoulins has 

 priority, and I have therefore accepted it. In 1857, Gray described the West 



