65 
necessary to take up the question about the name with which this 
species should be designated, the more so as there is a general 
disagreement among recent authors about this matter. The species 
is named Ophiura texturata (Lmk.) Forbes by Liitken and, in 
some of his works, by Koehler, while more recently the latter 
author adopts the name Oph. lacertosa (Linck.). Ly man („Chal- 
lenger“ Oph. p. 76) names it Ophioglypha ciliata Ljn. (should be 
Retzius). In Bell’s „Catalogue of the British Echinoderms“ it is 
named Ophiura ciliaris (Linné) and the same name is used by 
G ri eg. — I shall discuss these names in chronological order. 
That the „ Stella lacertosa u of Linck 1 ) is really the species under¬ 
stood by Oph. texturata Lmk. is very probable; it is especially a 
noteworthy faet that the fig. 4, Taf. 2 of Linck’s work apparently 
shows the pores along the midline of the ventral side of the arms, 
a feature so eminently characteristic of this species. But then 
Linck is pre-Linnean and not strietly binomial, and according to 
the rules cannot therefore come into consideration. 2 ) 
The Asterias ophiura of Linnæus (Syst. Naturæ, Ed. X, 1758, 
p. 662) evidently comprises all the true Ophiurids then known by 
him, as is evident from the literary references under the species. 
The diagnosis „A. radiata radiis quinque, corpore orbiculato quinque- 
lobo“ does, of course, not give the slightest hint at any definite spec¬ 
ies. In the Museum of Upsala are preserved two specimens labelled 
Asterias ophiura Linn., from the Museum Gust. Adolphi. It is 
quite possible that they represent the type of Linnæus’ Asterias 
ophiura , but it is not certain, and the original labels have been 
destroyed. But whether they are the types or not, they are not 
identical with our Oph. texturata; they belong to the genus Ophio- 
derma (both specimens apparently the same species). If it were 
certain that these specimens are the types of Asterias ophiura 
Linn., there might be reason for changing the name Ophioderma 
into Ophiura (as Ly man did, though for other reasons). Since, 
b De Stellis marinis liber singularis. 1733. p. 47. Taf. 2. fig. 4. 
2 ) Another thing is that, in cases where it would be very desirable to 
preserve a pre-linnean name, I. would not omit doing so on account of 
the rule. But it cannot be said to be especially desirable to keep the 
name lacertosa Linck for this species, the more so as the name lacer¬ 
tosa was used by Lamarck in quite another sense. 
Vidensk. Medd. fra Dansk naturh. Foren. Bd. 72. 5 
