07.04.2013 Views

'Alert' 1881-2

'Alert' 1881-2

'Alert' 1881-2

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

ECHINODEKMATA. 139<br />

10. OpMocoma brevipes.<br />

Peters, Archivfilr Natur. 1852, p. 85 ;<br />

see Lyman, p. 27.<br />

Mr. Lj'man (Prel. List, p. 27) gives as synonyms of this, his own<br />

0. insv.laria (about which there will, I suppose, be no dispute), the<br />

0. ternisjnna of Martens, an unnamed specimen of which, from<br />

the island of Mauritius, has been for many years in the collection of<br />

the British Museum and has for a long time been a source of much<br />

disquiet to myself (I am now persuaded that this is a specimen to<br />

which Dr. von Martens would have given the name ternisjj'ma),<br />

Ophiocoma varieguta and 0. brevisjnnosa of E. A. Smith, from the<br />

island of Rodriguez. I do not know that a more western locality<br />

than the island just named has ever been recorded l)y a zoologist<br />

at any rate, Dr. Haacke did not detect the species among the Ophiurids<br />

collected by Prof. Mtibius in the island of Mauritius *, unless<br />

he has been, as is possible, misled by the definition of 0. squamata<br />

given by M tiller and Troschel ; the three or four lateral spines, the<br />

two teutacle-scales, and the square markings on the upper armplates<br />

might deceive a hasty nomcuclator, but they could not, I<br />

think, mislead any one who refers to the second edition of Lamarck<br />

(vol. iii. ly40), p. 225, where he will find references to the plates<br />

of Link and 0. F. Miiller. Although the species there figured is<br />

regarded by the editors as distinct from 0. squamata, the resemblance<br />

between such an Oi^hiurid as this Ophiocoma and the Ophiothrix<br />

pentapliyUum figured by the two just-mentioned naturalists, is so<br />

very slight that we are forbidden from supposing that the Ophiura<br />

squamata, Lamk. {Opiiiocoma squamata, M. & Tr.), is a near ally of<br />

an Ophiothrix or Ophiothrix-lWa form.<br />

The variations exhibited by this very widely distributed species<br />

are indeed remarkable. It seemed for a time that the larger number<br />

and smaller size of the mouth-papilla) at the inner angles of 0. variegata<br />

and of 0. hrtvispinosa would indicate a certain difference ; but<br />

a difference of quite equal extent can be detected in the mouthorgans<br />

of a single specimen. The hollow square marking on the<br />

upper arm-plates, which, when well developed, seems to give such a<br />

characteristic appearance to the arms of this species, may be replaced<br />

by a black patch, or there may be a transverse bar, or there may be<br />

only the two lines left which run parallel to the long axis of the<br />

arm ; again, there may be spots, or the coloration may be fairly<br />

uniform. The colour of the disk may be pale, spotted, or reticu-<br />

lated; the mouth- shields spotted or uniform in colour.<br />

Levuka, Fiji.<br />

* MiJbius, ' Beitrage zur Meeresfauna der Insel Mauritius ' &c. (Berlin, 1880).<br />

Iq what follows I may seem to speak somewhat harshly of Dr. Haacke's services ;<br />

but I am bound to point out that the list of Ophiurids given on p. 50 of this<br />

work has no scientific value whatever. 0. dentata has been for many years<br />

regarded, first by Lyman (18()5) and since by others, as " only a middling-sized<br />

0. echinata;" the type of 0. aquamata has been lo.st, " and nobody can tell<br />

what it was, though it might have been 0. brevipes." Dr. Haacke makes no<br />

reference to either of these judgments.<br />

;

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!