Fossil Spatangoid Echinoids of Cuba Porter M. Kier Introduction Sanchez Roig did not have adequate photo­ graphic equipment; most of the illustrations of An extraordinary total of 401 fossil echinoids his 291 species are of poor quality. Consequently, have been described from Cuba. Most of the echinoid workers outside Cuba have found it species are Eocene to Miocene, with 157 Eocene, difficult to use his work. Generally his species 179 Oligocene, and 33 Miocene species. None has have been ignored, and this great Cuban echinoid been reported from the Pliocene, but 10 are pre­ fauna has not received the attention that it de­ sent in the Pleistocene. Twenty-two have been serves. reported from the Cretaceous, but none are older. This present work is devoted to a redescription Most of these species were described by Dr. of all the Cuban fossil spatangoid echinoids—in Mario Sanchez Roig, a medical doctor in Ha­ particular those in the Sanchez Roig Collection. vana, who over a period of thirty years amassed All Cuban specimens in other museums through­ a large collection of echinoids. With great pa­ out the world have also been studied. These tience and perseverance, he collected thousands include specimens in the Cotteau and Lambert of specimens from all over Cuba. He dedicated collections in France, the Palmer Collection at all his free time to this effort, spending days at the Academy of Natural Science in Philadelphia, one site searching for specimens. Many profes­ and the collection at the University of California sional and amateur collectors gave or sold him in Berkeley. Also examined were the Cuban spec­ their specimens as his dedication to this work imens (some identified and presented by Sanchez became known throughout Cuba. Workers in the Roig) in the Smithsonian's National Museum of quarries would save him any specimens that they Natural History, the American Museum of Nat­ found. ural History, and the Museum of Comparative From 1920 to 1953 he described and illustrated Zoology at Harvard. Furthermore, where possi­ in numerous publications this vast collection. Al­ ble, specimens from elsewhere in the Caribbean though not formally trained in the field, his re­ were studied for comparison with the Cuban search was equal in quality to that of echinologists echinoids. In particular, all the specimens of Ja­ elsewhere in the world. He maintained his own maican Eocene echinoids in the great Arnold collection for many years, until it eventually be­ Collection at the Museum of Comparative Zool­ came the property of the Cuban Academy of ogy were compared to the Cuban material. Sciences, which is now responsible for its care and Of 179 spatangoid species reported from Cuba, curation. 61 (described by Sanchez Roig) are herein con­ sidered to be synonyms. This decision to place so Porter M. Kier, Department of Paleobiology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560. many species in synonymy reflects a differing 1 SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO PALEOBIOLOGY concept of what amount of variation can be out the sutures, making the plate arrangement expected within a species. Sanchez Roig, who had visible. The plate sutures on unweathered speci­ very few specimens of many of his species, could mens are normally invisible. not know the extent of this variation. If in doubt, All of the extant Cuban type specimens are he seemed to prefer naming a new species. How­ described herein and re-illustrated. The descrip­ ever, the number of species of the same genus tion of species follows the procedures prescribed from one locality is far higher than one would by Chesher (1968), who noted that many spatan­ expect. For example, Sanchez Roig recognized 11 goid characteristics remain the same regardless of species oi Eupatagus from his "Cervantes" locality. the size of the specimen. These characters are, In my opinion the differences between these spe­ therefore, particularly useful in systematic com­ cies either fall within the range of variation com­ parisons. For example, the fascioles cross partic­ mon to single species or result from postmortem ular plates on the test and remain on those same deformation. plates throughout the growth of the echinoid. The validity of many species is difficult to Therefore, Chesher (1968:5) recommended that determine because of the paucity of well-pre­ echinoid workers always record which plate served specimens. It has been necessary to make (numbered from the peristome) bore a part of a numerous arbitary decisions with which another fasciole. Likewise the same plates will continue to worker could disagree. For this reason the type surround the periproct, and specific plates will specimens of the synonymized species are de­ carry the first petaloid pores throughout the ani­ scribed and re-illustrated herein so that other mal's life. Wherever possible, I have tried to workers can make their own judgments as to the determine these characters. Unfortunately the validity of the species. Synomymized species are fascioles of many specimens are not visible; and not redescribed unless the type specimens were on others not enough plate sutures are visible to available. A questionmark before the generic allow a count of the number of plates to the name indicates my uncertainty as to whether or peristome. not it is a synonym, such as PEupatagus calistoides All the available specimens were used in the Sanchez Roig. Uncertainty of a generic identifi­ description. Unfortunately only one specimen cation is indicated by a question mark immedi­ each is known of many species, making it impos­ ately after the generic name as in Linthia? avilensis sible to evaluate the extent of variation within a Sanchez Roig. species. The only way to increase the accuracy of the An interpretation of the living habits of each identification would be to obtain more specimens. genus is made possible by the discoveries of Smith However, many of the original localities are now (1980), whose comparative studies of living ma­ covered with vegetation. Those sites that are still terial have revealed the relationship between the exposed yield few specimens. For example, Drs. character of a pore and the tubefoot that extends Albear and Formell took me to the quarry at from it. One can discern on the basis ofthe fossil's "Cervantes" where so many of Sanchez Roig's pores, particularly in the anterior ambulacrum, specimens were collected; only a few fragments whether and into what kind of sediment the of echinoids were located. spatangoid could burrow. Not only is the number of specimens inade­ PREVIOUS WORK.—The first published record quate, but most are badly weathered. This is of fossil echinoids in Cuba was by Parra in 1787, particularly unfortunate with the spatangoids be­ in which he included figures of some specimens. cause they lose their fascioles postmortem—an Sagra (1855) noted that species of echinoids de­ extremely important character in specific and scribed by d'Orbigny were also present in Cuba. generic identification. The position ofthe fascioles Agassiz, in Agassiz and Desor (1847:22, 143, 144, on many specimens must be inferred. One advan­ 168) mentioned four species that occurred in tage of this weathering, however, is that it etches Cuba including his new species, Asterostoma excen- NUMBER 55 tricum. Cotteau (1871) described two new species This revision could have never been accom­ of Asterostoma from Cuba and redescribed A. ex- plished without the help and full cooperation of centricum. the Cuban Academy of Sciences. I thank Dr. Later, Michelin (1855) described a new species Wilfredo Torres Iribar, President ofthe Academy, and mentioned two others as occurring in Cuba. for his support. Ing. Amelia Brito Rojas and Ing. Cotteau (1875), in his introduction to a mono­ Lenia Montero Zamora, directors ofthe Instituto graph of the fossil echinoids of St. Bartholomew de Geologia y Paleontologia, helped in every way and Anguilla, briefly described 10 species from possible. They provided access to the Sanchez Cuba, 5 of which were new. Cortazar (1880) Roig Collection (SRC) and gave permission to described one new Encope from Cuba. In 1881, borrow specimens for preparation here in Wash­ Cotteau published a major monograph of fossil ington. Drs. Francisco de Albear and Francisco echinoids from Cuba, in which 20 species (5 of Formell guided field trips to some of the more which were new) were described. Egozcue y Cia important Cuban echinoid localities. Dr. Albear in Cotteau (1897) used Cotteau's descriptions and was of great assistance in providing current stra­ illustrations and reported some new occurrences tigraphic information on Sanchez Roig's locali­ for species previously known elsewhere. Forty-one ties. Consuelo Diaz Otero and Rafaela Perez species were included. aided me in my search for specimens in the In 1922, Jackson completed a monograph on Sanchez Roig Collection. Lie. Sergio Jorge Pas­ all the fossil echinoids of the West Indies. Forty- trana, Director of international relations of the seven species were from Cuba, including three Academy, working in conjunction with the new species. Lambert (1928) described one new Smithsonian Institution, made all the arrange­ species of Echinoneus and noted the presence of an ments necessary for my visits to Havana to study African species of Discoides in Cuba; in 1932 he the collection. Here at the Smithsonian, Ross described 9 more Cuban species. Weisbord (1934) Simons set up the original program for the ex­ described 22 new species, including 10 spatan­ change of scientists with the Cuban Academy goids, that he collected at 5 localities in Cuba. and expedited subsequent travel to Havana. Fi­ Finally, Zitt (1981) very skillfully redescribed 2 nally Dr. Abelardo Moreno, the Director of the species ofthe spatangoid Aguayoaster and discussed National Zoos and Aquaria, encouraged me their living habits. throughout this study. Sanchez Roig started publishing on fossil echi­ Mary Hurd Lawson, Smithsonian Institution, noids in 1920 and continued until 1953.