OCR Text |
Show 498 PROF. F. J. BELL ON THE GENUS ASTERIAS. [May 3, It will be of interest to institute a comparison between the two lists here given and that of M . Perrier. Here we find altogether the not inconsiderable number of one hundred and eleven specific appellations ; and of this only thirty-five are to be found in the second or synonymic list. M . Perrier describes all together forty-nine species; and when we look through his synonymy, we find that all together he makes mention of sixty-eight names. The proportion of accepted to synonymous terms is therefore almost exactly the same in the two lists. This is, I must say, a somewhat painful state of things; for I am inclined to regard an increase in the number of proved synonyms as a not unfair proof of advance in our knowledge of the forms described. Advance of knowledge has, however, so far taken place since the publication of Perrier's ' Revision,' that our knowledge of the Arctic fauna and of that of the more southern seas has been somewhat increased, while the critical remarks of Verrill have somewhat reduced the number of species which, named by Valenciennes or by himself, M . Perrier had regarded as undescribed. Comparatively lately (1878) Prof. Perrier has published an essay on the Geographical Distribution of the Starfishes, in the ' Nouvelles Archives du Museum' (2me ser.) ; and in the nearly complete list of species which he there gives, he enumerates eighty-two species in the genus Asterias, or five more than are named in the list just given. This new list moreover contains the names of seven species not detailed by M . Perrier, viz.:-A. mollis of Studer (studeri of Bell) ; A. perrieri, E. Smith ; A. fulgens, Philippi; and A. alba, brandli, neglecta, and obtusi-spinosa of Bell. On the other hand, M . Perrier's list contains the following, which, as I think, have been demonstrated by Verrill to be synonymous of names already entered, viz. A. arenicola, A. borealis, A. fabricii, A. pallida, and A. stimpsoni. A. madeirensis I have shown to be synonymous with A. webbiana ; A. globifera will be placed with Uniophora: A. wilkinsoni and A. aster of Gray I cannot, as I have already said, even pretend to recognize. A. jehennesi would appear to be the same as A. calamaria. Like M. Perrier, I retain in the lists the name of A. bootes, "a cause de l'autorite de ses auteurs;" but as the type is lost or unknown, the species will probably always be-what it has already been called, one of the " mysteries of Paris." Of late years the only catalogue of the genus which claimed to be complete was published by M M . Dujardin and Hupe ; it details, however, only thirty-seven species, of which nine have, with the progress of our knowledge, been since referred to other generic divisions. This brief review will, I think, be sufficient to afford evidence of the pressing necessity of a closer and more critical study of the constituent species ; what now will follow is to be regarded as a preliminary attempt to make some sort of introduction to a work |