1881.] THE SURVEY OF H.M.S. 'ALERT.* 93 



the outermost of these rows, in which the spines are ordinarily 

 arranged in pairs, and above by a row of, if any thing, shorter 

 spines ; these are sometimes, towards the apex of the arm, arranged 

 in pairs. Oa the dorsal face of the arm there are three sets of short 

 spines, arranged irregularly in pairs, and extending along the arm ; 

 the median row is by far the most regular. The arms are five in 

 number ; but one was broken off from the specimen under description; 

 of the four remaining two are white and two are black on their 

 dorsal surface ; the rest of the creature is white, as are all the 

 spines. The disk is exceedingly small and is but sparsely provided with 

 spines; the radius of the disk is 14 millims., the length of the 

 longest arm 70 miUims. ; so that i?=5r. 



One specimen. Sandy Point, 9-10 fathoms; bottom, sand. 



AsTERiAS cuNNiNGHAMi, Pcrrier. 



A. cunninghami, Perrier, Rev. Stell. 1875, p. 75; Ann. Nat. 

 Hist. (4) xvii. p. 3fi. 



General appearance not unlike that of A. rubens. Arms five, 

 elongated, gradually and regularly decreasing in width ; disk small ; 

 madreporic plate obscure. A single row of adambulacral spines, 

 flanked by a double longitudinal row of spines, every two being 

 closely appressed ; the sides of the arms are occupied by a number 

 of small tubercles. On the dorsal surface of the arms the tubercles 

 are closely packed both towards the tip and the base, while they 

 are much more sparse in the middle third of arm and on the 

 central portion of the disk itself. Colour orange. ii = 30, r = S, 

 therefore i2=3*75r. Breadth of arms at base 9 millims. 



Three perfect specimens, of which one is much smaller than the 

 other two ; they are all smaller than the type specimen. Tom Bay, 

 0-30 fathoms; bottom, rock, kelp, and sand. 



ASTERIAS RUPICOLA (?). 



Asterias rupicola, Verrill, Bull. U.S. Nat. Museum, i. iii. p. 71. 



There are in the British Museum three specimens, which were 

 collected by Dr. Cunningham, but to which no definite locality 

 is attached ; these specimens I now, though with very considerable 

 hesitation, assign to the Kerguelen form lately described by 

 Prof. Verrill. The hesitation is not due to any insufficiency on 

 the part of the description, which is by the hand of a master, 

 but from the fact that in some points, such as the propor- 

 tion of the greater and lesser radii and the breadth of the 

 arms at their base, the specimens now in hand have the arms 

 longer and more slender than those of Mr. Verrill's specimens. 

 When, however, we take into account the appalling number of 

 specific terms which have been applied to forms belonging to 

 the genus Asterias, we shall, I think, act more wisely if we re- 

 frain from adding to these synonyms on the score of differences in 

 character which may at some future time be shown to be due either 



