:546 " THETIS " SCIENTIFIC RESULTS. 



son, and I am satisBed that the specimens from Stations 13, 48 

 and 55 are conspecific, although none of them have the disc so 

 closely covered with stumps, or the radial shields so completely 

 concealed, as in the "Challenger" specimen. The individual 

 from Station 36 is remarkable for having very few stumps and 

 the radial shields conspicuously bare ; but it is a very young 

 specimen. The specimens from Station 44 are so small and in 

 such poor condition, their identification is pure guess-work. The 

 specimens from Station 10 are the largest and best preserved of 

 all ; the disc bears many slender, acicular spines among the 

 stumps, as in acestra, and were it not for two things I should 

 have I'eferred them to that species ; the upper arm-plates are 

 like those of ccespitosa, not like those of acestra, and the arms are 

 prettily banded with pink (or reddish) and blue (or pur))lish), 

 exactly as in nearlj^ all the specimens of cmspitosa, and entirely 

 unlike acestra. For the present, it seems to me best to consider 

 these specimens from Station 10, a variety of ccespitosa, but we 

 shall never understand their true position until a careful study 

 can be made of an abundance of living and fresh material of 

 Ophiothi^ix at Port Jackson or some neighbouring point. 



OPHIOTHRIX SPONGICOLA. 



■ Ophiothrix spongicola, Stimpson, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., vii., 

 1855, p. 385. 



1 specimen from Station 10. Off Broken Head, 28 fathoms ; 

 fine sand. 



1 specimen from Station 36. Off Botany Bay, 20-23 fathoms ; 

 sand to rock. 



1 specimen from Station 54. Within Jervis Bay, 10-11 

 -f athom« ; seaweed and sand. 



These specimens are identical with three fine specimens from 

 Port Jackson in the collection of the Museum of Comparative 

 Zoology, which were received in exchange from the Australian 

 Museum, labelled 0, fumaria, M. & T, I have compared these 

 specimens with the specimens of 0. fumaria in the collection of 

 the Museum of Compai'ative Zoology, which Mr. Lyman h 

 marked as having been compared with the original specimens of 

 fumaria in Paris, and they are certainly not conspecific. Bell-^ 

 is responsible for the identification of these Port Jackson speci- 

 mens, as they are undoubtedly the same as those referred by him 

 to fumaria. Finding that they were not fumaria, I made a more 

 thorough examination of the literature on Ophiothrix, and I am 



2 7Bell— Zool. Rep. "Alert," 1884, p. 140. 



