Here is a small specimen, just brought from the sea-shore at Cockburnspath (a most romantic and delightful locality, situated on the coast of Berwickshire). It is neatly wrapped up in a mantle of sea-weed. Freed of its verdant envelope, I deposit the youthful Rubens upon his back—'willy-nilly'—in a tumbler partly filled with clear sea-water, and then proceed to watch its movements through a magnifier.
At a glance we perceive that each of its five rays is grooved on its lower surface, and filled with minute perforations, through which is gradually protruded a multitude of fleshy suckers, knobbed at the end. It is by aid of these organs that the animal grasps its food, and changes its position, as we shall presently see. One of the rays is now slowly lifted up and moved about in various directions, while from its extreme point the suckers are extended to the utmost limit. No sooner do they touch the side of the vessel than they are firmly fixed and contracted. A point d'appui being thus gained, the animal is enabled by degrees to draw its body round, so as to get another regiment of suckers into play, and, by such plan of operations being repeated, the animal is eventually enabled to 'right itself,' and crawl up the polished surface of the glass.
Generally, when the Star-fish is disturbed, or placed on a dry piece of stone, the suckers are withdrawn into the body, leaving no signs of their previous existence except a series of minute tubercles. In fact, the Asterias, although enabled to adhere with great tenacity to any foreign object when immersed in water, possesses but little power to retain its hold if the fluid be removed. Hence the young zoologist, keeping this peculiarity in mind, should not too hurriedly return a verdict of 'Found dead,' when he meets with a helpless specimen upon the beach, for in all likelihood, were the creature to be laid for a few minutes in a rock-pool, it would soon exhibit signs of returning animation.
A simpler, though not so sure a test for ascertaining whether a Star-fish be living or not, is to handle the specimen. If it feels soft and flabby, it is dead; but if tolerably firm to the touch, it may be 'recalled to life,' by the means pointed out.
It may not be out of place to chronicle here a singular circumstance which the writer has often verified in connection with the true Star-fishes. It is this. When any captured specimens have been placed in confinement, no matter how large or small such might be, they never moved through the liquid element with a tithe of the rapidity that I well knew they were capable of. At the sea-side, I have seen a specimen of the Cross-fish glide through the water so nimbly, yet withal so gracefully, that I have felt inclined to rank natation among the few other acomplishments of which the species can boast.
The Uraster rubens is also popularly known as 'Five Fingers.' For ages past it has been subject to the bitter denunciation of fishermen and others, for the injury which it is said to inflict upon oysters. At one time, according to Bishop Spratt, the Admiralty Court laid penalties upon those engaged in the oyster-fishing who did not tread under their feet, or throw upon the shore, a fish they call a Five-Finger, resembling a spur-rowel, because that fish gets into the oysters when they gape, and sucks them out. Poets have also endeavoured to perpetuate the vulgar opinion:—
'The prickly Star-fish creeps with fell deceit,
To force the Oyster from his close retreat,
Whose gaping lids their widened void display;
The watchful Star thrusts in a pointed ray—
Of all its treasures robs the rifled case,
And empty shells the sandy hillock grace.'
Even yet the oyster fishermen at certain localities wreak all possible vengeance upon the 'submarine Dando's,' for their supposed gourmandizing propensities. I say supposed, for although so many naturalists have studied the question, it is not, up to the present time, satisfactorily settled. Some deny the alleged tendency altogether, while less sceptical observers are unable to understand the mode in which the Star-fish could injure an animal apparently so capable of self-defence as the oyster. According to certain authors, the Star-fish encircles the oyster with its five fingers, and by some clever process of suction destroys the unfortunate mollusc. Others, again, maintain that the first step of the attack is the injection of some marine chloroform between the shells of the oyster, and that during the insensibility that follows, the Star-fish effects an entrance.
As this is an interesting subject, perhaps the reader would like to have the exact words which are used by two celebrated naturalists, one of whom attempts to vindicate the character of the Asteridæ, the other to blacken it.
Sir John Dalyell—a high authority upon all matters of marine zoology—shrewdly remarks: 'I have not heard it suggested that the Star-fish possesses any kind of solvent compelling the bivalves to sunder. Neither can its hostility be very deadly to the larger univalves, from the distance to which they are enabled to retreat within their portable dwellings. Their general habits are, to force the shells of smaller bivalves asunder, and to devour the contents; they likewise consume the substance of ordinary fishes entire; nevertheless, as far as I am yet aware, their destruction of oysters is destitute of evidence. The Star-fish sometimes shows an eversion of stomach, or of some membrane of it. Whether this may be the means of affecting their prey, merits investigation.'