167 
Schayeri being from Tasmania it could not beforehand be stated 
which of the two species must keep the name Ophionereis Schayeri. 
Through the kindness of the late Professor R. H artmeyer I have 
had the opportunity of examining the type specimen, which is in 
the Berlin Museum; although it is in a poor condition there is no 
doubt that it belongs to the Australian form, and accordingly this 
latter must keep the name Ophionereis Schayeri (Muller Troschel). 
For the New Zealand species the name Ophionereis fasciata Hutton 
must be revived. 
This result, that the New Zealand form is specifically distinet 
from the Australian form, considerably restricts the geographical 
distribution of both. O. Schayeri is known only from Australia and 
Tasmania. Regarding O. fasciata the question remains whether it is 
really identical with the species of Ophionereis oceurring at Juan 
Fernandez, as it is maintained by Ludwig in his report on “Die 
Ophiuren der Sammlung Plate“ (Zool. jahrb. Suppl. IV. 1898, p. 
765). This question I am also able to solve through the kindness 
of the late Prof. Hartmeyer, who sent me some material of the 
Juan Fernandez form. I must agree that it is very difficult to find 
characters by which to distinguish- between the Juan Fernandez 
and the New Zealand form. Nevertheless these forms are certainly 
not identical. This is proved by the faet that the eggs of the former 
are twice the size of those of the New Zealand species (0,2 mm 
against 0,i mm); this evidently means that the development is 
quite different in these two forms.^) Probably the Juan Fernandez- 
form is also a separate species (it does not appear to me to be 
identical with O. albomaculata E. A. Smith from the Galapagos Is¬ 
lands). But this question does not concern us here; for the present 
it must suffice to have shown that the New Zealand species is not 
identical either with the Australian or the Juan Fernandez form 
and is known only from the New Zealand region. 
In 1916 Professor H. B. Kirk published in the “Transactions 
of the, New Zealand Institute“, Vol. XLVIII, a short preliminary 
notice “On the mueh-abbreviated development of a Sand-star (Oph¬ 
ionereis Schayeri ?).“ ^) His reason for referring the eggs and em- 
1) This also holds good for Ophionereis Schayeri, the eggs of which are 
likewise twice the size of those of O. fasciata. 
2) p. 383-84. Pis. XXVII-XXVIII. 
