KUNGL. SV. VET. AKADEMIENS HANDLINGAR. BAND 59. N:0 4. 15 



If we examine the description of C. dislincta, it agrees to a rather great extent 

 with my specimens. The only character with a bigger difference is the number of 

 the C:i. In the original specimen they are said to have been XXX. According to 

 A. H. Clark (op. cit. 42, p. 46), Actinomelra parvicirra Carpenter (Chall. Rep.) pro 

 parte should be C. distincla, which is not mentioned among the specimens described. 

 Having found in Chall. Rep., Vol. 26 among the figures of Act. parvicirra Pl. 67, 

 fig. 4 so me proximal pinnules with the characteristic C omaster- combs and together 

 with them a figure of the animal from which the pinnules were taken, I do not 

 hesitate to take this specimen to be C. distincla (N. B. The remaining specimens 

 referred to this species by Carpenter are species of the genus Comanthus having 

 smaller and much more numerous teeth in the combs). B ut in this specimen of 

 Carpenter there are about XIV cirri. Here the number of the C:i apparently varies 

 between XIV — XXX. This is a pretty considerable difference. 



What is the explanation? How is it that the characters are so vague and 

 fluctuating? This might be due, chiefly, to the fact that the characters used as 

 systematic distinguishing marks have a rather low value as such, so that a great 

 number of the forms described are not in reality species but onty edafic forms of 

 one and the same greatly varying species. In order to confirm this fact the original 

 specimens ought of course to be brought together and critically compared with each 

 other side by side. A new description of possibly existing good species ought to go 

 hand in hand with this examination. All this, however, is pia desideria and one has 

 to satisfy oneself by ploughing through the descriptions of the species and only 

 noting when connecting intermediate forms are found and in such cases considering 

 whether the forms ought not to be levelled under one and the same species. Perhaps 

 statistical investigations of the variability of the systematic characters founded on 

 abundant material are to be recommended in the Crinoids more than in any other 

 animal group. Only when this method has been tested, only when we have obtained 

 a clearer idea of the systematic validity of the characters, will we be able to speak 

 with any confidence of the extention of the forms and limitations of the species 

 within this province. 



To this species I have also referred an obviously young specimen of the genus 

 Comaster taken at station 1 on the 29th of May. 1 The habitus of the animal is 

 rather different and so I will first give a description of this and then examine its 

 systematic position. 



Cd flattened, 1,5 mm, the bare part deepened. The börder swollen, carrying 

 the C:i. These are XIII, 9—14; 6 mm. First segment short, 3 d — 5 th about twice 

 as long as broad, then the segments decreasing, the 5 last ones being stouter than 

 the preceding ones (as is usual in the Comasterids). On the dorsal side of the 

 5th_gth segments blunt distal knobs, the 9 th — ll th ones with distinct spines, which 



1 In the pot iii which the animal was enolosed there were two slips with two different statoments of 

 locality hut only one animal. The statement not given hefore was: Cape Jauhert, 45 Miles W. S. "NY. Depth 

 48 feet. 8 /? 1911. The slip lirst given is, however, very deeply red-coloured, the latter almost uiicoloured, from 

 which I conclude, as the animaTs colour in lite was evidcntly dark red. that the former is more correct. 



