Bd. VI: 4) THE ECHINOIDEA. 65 



of one and the same species*; he likewise unites with this species the H cordatus 

 described by VERRILL from Kerguelen (1876). The same course was, for the rest, al- 

 ready previously adopted by Stl der in his paper on the ^Gazelle* Echinoidea (1880). 

 BERNARD (Echinides recueillis par l'expedition du Cap Horn 1882— 1883. Bull, du 

 Mus. d'hist. nat. 1895. No. 7) goes even farther, uniting with his Tripyhis cavernosus 

 not only the two species australis and pJiilippi {cordatus is not named) but also 

 Tripyhis excavatus Phil. — Meissner in 1S96 (Die von Herrn Dr. Plate aus Chile 

 heimgebrachten Seeigel) maintains Tripyhis excavatus as distinct besides Hemiaster 

 cavernosus, under which latter the rest (australis, ant arctic a, philippi and cordatus) 

 are included as synonyms. The same course is followed in his paper »Die Echinoi- 

 den d. Hamburger Magalhaensischen Sammelreise» 1900, where he further includes 

 under Hemiaster cavernosus some specimens distinguished by PFEFFER with the 

 M.S. name Hemiaster Agassizii. — Recently two new species have been described, 

 viz. H. gallegosensis from Patagonia (De Loriol, Notes pour servir a l'etude des 

 Echinodermes. 2 Ser. II. 1904) and H. elongatus from the South Orkneys (R. Ko-EH- 

 LER, Asteries, Ophiures et Echinides de l'Expedition antarctique nationale Ecossaise. 

 Trans. R. Soc. Edinburgh. XLVI. 1908). While De LORIOL is inclined to regard 

 all the previously described species as distinct, KOEHLER joins DODERLEIN (Echi- 

 noiden d. deutschen Tiefsee-Expedition 1906) in regarding australis, cordatus and 

 pJiilippii as synonyms of Hemiaster cavernosus. (In ;Resultats du Voyage du S. Y. 

 Belgica, 1897—1899. Zoologie. Echinides et Ophiures. 1901, p. 13 Prof. KOEHLER 

 expresses the opinion that also Tripyhis excavatus should be made a synonym of 

 Hemiaster cavernosus.) The same view, evidently, is held by Prof. Bell (Echino- 

 derma of the National Antarctic Expedition 1908), though not stated explicitly; he 

 only states he is inclined to follow A. Agassiz in regarding Tripy/us excavatus as 

 distinct. — Finally, it may be mentioned that Philippi (Uber die chilenischen See- 

 igel. Verh. d. deutschen natunviss. Vereins. Santiago. 1892) names, besides Tri- 

 pyhis excavatus, cavernosus, australis, also Tr. cordatus (without author name) and 

 Tr. Scytliei Phil. The latter is evidently meant as a new species, but as it is a 

 nomen nudum, it has to be dropped. 



Besides the above mentioned species the following related forms have been de- 

 scribed: Tripyhis PJiilippii GRAY (Ann. N. H. 185 1), Schizaster Moseleyi A. Ag. 

 (Challenger Ech.), and a couple of new genera have also been established more re- 

 cently, viz. Spatagodesma (Dioj/iedce) by A. Agassiz 1898 (cf. Panamic Deep Sea 

 Echini 1904 p. 198) and Amphipneustes (Lorioli) by KOEHLER (Echinides et Ophiures 

 de »Belgica» 1901). The former is regarded by its author as nearest related to 

 Agassizia; as I have shown (»Ingolf» Echinoidea II. 1907, p. 114), it is evidently 

 only the young of either Abatus or Schizaster (Brisaster). The latter is regarded 

 by the author as being nearest to Palceopneustes ; it is also very nearly related to 



9— 100133. Schwedischt Sudpelar-Expedition 1901 — 1903. 



