“Capulus subcompressus Pelseneer, 1903 (Figs 207, 208, 209)
Capulus subcompressus Pelseneer, 1903: 20, pl. 5, figs 52-54; Hedley, 1911: 5; Thiele, 1912, 199, pl. 17, figs 13-15; Smith, 1915: 66; Eales, 1923: 11; Carcelles, 1944: 2; Carcelles, 1953: 182, pl. 2, fig. 42; Powell, 1958: 189; Powell, 1960: 143; Arnaud 1972c: 124, fig. 15; Egorova, 1982: 26, figs 123-126.
MATERIAL EXAMINED: TAE Stns 1, 4, 79.98; NZOI Stns A449, A456, A468, A469, A470, A519, A528, A530; Stanford University Stns EAD-2, GLD-13, M; Eltanin, Stns 1885, 1896, 1995, 1997, 2007, 2031, 2065; USNM 612764, 77°38'S, 163°11'W, 640 m; USNM 612789, 77°26'S, 169°30'E, 321 m; USNM 612874, 77º30’S, 166°04'E, 402 m; USNM 612858, 77°37'S, 43°15'W, Weddell Sea, 430 m; USNM 612888, 77°32'S, 44°45'W, Weddell Sea, 283 m; USNM 612904, 72º12’S, 170°20'E, 203 m; USNM 612931, 77°50.8'S, 166°34'E, 33 m; USNM 612999, 72°05-8'S, 172°15-2'E, 392 m; USNM 613039, 66°32.94'S, 93°00'90'E, Davis Sea, 80 m; USNM 613066, 72°17-2'S, 170°19-3'E, 36 m; USNM 638829, 77º40’S, 30°35'W, Weddell Sea, 387 m; USNM 638926, 76°30'S, 156°19'W; about 3 km west of Cape Spencer-Smith, White Island, McMurdo Sound, 100 m offshore, 67 m, University of Canterbury, Dec 1976-Jan 1977; off Cape Armitage, McMurdo Sound, 47 m, P.N. Slattery, 21 Nov 1974.
DISTRIBUTION: Capulus subcompressus is relatively common in the Ross Sea in depths of 33-640 m. It is otherwise known only from the borders of the antarctic continent, having been recorded from 49°E, 53°E, 54°E, 89°E, 139°E, and from the Bellingshausen and Weddell Seas. It has not been recorded from the Antarctic Peninsula or from anywhere outside the continental margin.
REMARKS: This species probably lives attached to some cylindrical object. Echinoids such as cidarids with relatively large spines have been suggested by Pelseneer (1903), Powell (1958) and Arnaud (1972). Powell also suggested the anterior canal of a fusiform gastropod. Arnaud showed that on several occasions cidarids of two species were collected at the same stations as Capulus.
Although such an association seems very likely, Capulus subcompressus has not as yet been recorded attached to any host. If such an association exists, the restricted distribution of C. subcompressus may well reflect a similar distribution for the host species.”
(Dell, 1990: 121-122)
