THE STARFISHES OF THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS. 
1089 
Marginal plates are very small. The plates which probably represent the superomarginals are 
larger than adjacent abactinal plates, and are placed without reference to the regular rows of the latter. 
They bear a tuft of minute spinelets. The inferomarginals are larger than superomarginals, and like- 
wise bear a glomerular tuft of minute spinelets. Both series resemble tiny paxillae. 
Madreporic body small, situated near center of disk. Striations coarse, irregular, radiating. Anal 
opening subcentral 8 to 9 mm. from madreporic body. Ambulacral feet with small sucking disks. 
Color in life: Upper surface bright vermilion, with a madder-pink cast, the G radial ridges intense 
scarlet vermilion. Actinal surface scarlet vermilion, a large area in central part of disk cream color, 
slightly spotted with vermilion. Edge of ambulacral furrow slightly more yellowish than rest of light 
patch. Ambulacral feet translucent yellowish brown (raw sienna). 
Variations: A small specimen (R=35 mm. ) is essentially like the large individuals. Most of the 
plates of the abactinal interradial area bear but 1 tuft of spinelets, 7 to 10 in number, and widely 
radiating. The larger plates of central portion of disk bear 4 to 8 tufts. Mouth plates shorter than in 
adult, and the furrow spinelets much slenderer, 5 to 6 in number, and united by a web. Actinal 
mouth spines fewer. Adambulacral furrow spines 5 or 6 at base of furrow, 3 or 4 on outer part. 
Localities: Type (no. 21180, U. S. National Museum) from 4101, Pailolo Channel, between Mauai 
and Molokai islands, 143-122 fathoms, coral sand, shells, foraminifera; bottom temperature 59.7°; 3 
specimens. Taken also at 3835, south coast of Molokai, 169-182 fathoms, fine brown sand and mud; 
1 specimen. 
This remarkable starfish, which is a true Anseropoda, is perhaps the oddest species in the Hawaiian 
collection. Like its congeners, it is literally flatter than a pancake, which character, added to its 
brilliant coloring, gives it a truly bizarre appearance. The animal is very delicate on account of its 
extreme thinness. All the specimens are more or less injured, but the type is entire. Anseropoda 
insignis is probably nearest A. placenta of the Mediterranean region. It differs, however, in having 
constantly 6 rays, and in details of adambulacral and abactinal armature. A. rosacea, from Japan 
and the Bay of Bengal, is a fifteen-rayed form, which likewise differs in its armature. A. diaplnnea 
(Sladen) and A. pellucida (Alcock) are apparently widely different forms. 
This species evidently feeds largely upon shrimps, for the stomachs of 2 individuals are crammed 
with these small crustaceans ranging from 5 to 25 mm. in length. It would be interesting to learn 
in what manner the prey is secured. 
Family ECHINASTERIDAt Verrill, 1871, emended. 
Echinasteridse Verrill, Trans. Conn. Acad., vol. 1, 1867, part 2, p. 343. 
Key to Hawaiian genera of Echinaster idx. 
a. Disk small. Spinulation small. Spinelets isolated or grouped. No pedicellarite. 
- b. Abactinal plates bearing small spinelets in more or less compact groups Henricia 
bb. Abactinal plates bearing simple isolated spines Echinaster 
aa. Disk moderately developed. Rays 5. Abactinal plates plates regularly disposed, having small 
isolated spinelets. Marginal plates with large valvate pedicellarise. Actinal intermediate 
. plates bearing one or more large flattened spinelets Valvaster 
Subfamily ECHIEASTERINU VIGUIER, 1878. 
Echinasterinss Viguier, Anatomie Compare du Squelette des Stelldrides. <Archiv. Zool. Exp6r. et G6n<Sr., t. vii, 1878, 
p. 123 (separate). 
Genus HENRICIA Gray. 
Henricia Gray, Ann. N. H., ser. 1, vol. vi, 1840, p. 184. Type Asterias sanguinolenla O. F. Muller. 
Linchia Forbes, nec Nardo, Mem. VVern'., vol. vm, 1839, p. 120. 
Oribrella Forbes, nec Agassiz, British Starfishes, 1841, p. 106. 
Cribrella, Liitken, Gronl. Echinod., 1857, p. 30; and most other authors up to present day. 
Echinaster , Muller and Troschel, System der Asteriden, 1842, p. 22 (pars). 
Henricia, Bell, Ann. N. H., ser. 6, vol. vi, 1890, p. 472. 
Prof. F. J. Bell (op. cit.) has explained why the name Cribrella can not be used for this genus. 
Since few writers have cared to follow the ordinary rules of nomenclature in this case, however, it 
may be well to state again why Cribrella has no status in nomenclature. 
