1881.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 279 



*1S60. Centrocr. multicornus Lyon (Actinocr. multicoraus). Trans. Amer. Philos. 

 Soc, vol. 13, p. 455, PI. 27, fig. e ; also Hall, Paleont. N. Y., vol. v, Pt. ii, 

 p. 6, (advance sheets 1878). Nucleocrinus bed. Falls of the Ohio. 



*1860. Centrocr. pentaspiaus Lyon (Actinocr. pentaspinus). Type of the sub- 

 genus. Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., vol. 13, p. 453, PI. 27, figs, d, d 1 ; also 

 Hall, Paleont. N. Y,, vol. v, Pt. ii, p. 6, (advance sheet). Nucleocrinus bed. 

 Falls of the Ohio. 



&. Agaricocrinites. 



5. CARPOCRINUS Miiller. 



(Amend. Wachsm. and Spr.) 



1841. Miiller. Monatsb. Berl. Akad. Wissenscli., i, p. 208. 

 1855. Miiller. Verhandl. naturh. Verein, xii, p. 19. 

 1855. F. Roemer. Lethsea Geogn. (Ausg. 3), p. 237. 

 1857. Pictet. Traite de Paleont., iv, p. 328. 

 1879. Zittel. Handb. d. Palajont, i, p. 19. 



Syn. Plwenicocrimis Aust. 1843, Ann. and Mag. ISTat. Hist., xi, p. 205. 



Syn. Abracrinus D'Orb. 1850, Prodr. de Paleont., i, p. 47. (Not Ibid, 

 p. 156) ; also Course elem. de Paleont., ii, p. 144. 



Syn. Habrocrinus Angelin, 1878, Iconog. Crin. Suec, p. 3. 



Syn. Piojiocrinus Angelin. Ibid., p. 4. 



Angelin and the two Austins, in proposing their genera Piono- 

 crinus and Phoenicocrinus, were evidently not acquainted with 

 the genus Carpocrinus^ which had previously been described by 

 Miiller. Under Carjwcrinus, Miiller placed Actinocr inus simplex 

 and A. exjyansus Phill., but as the two species represent different 

 generic forms, as a rule, the first becomes the type of the 

 genus, and G. simj)lex has been recognized as such in 1855 b}' 

 Roemer. Neither can we accept, not even subgenericall}^ Habro- 

 crinus, {Abracrinus) D'Orbigny, which differs from Pionocrinus 

 solel}' in having a few more interradial plates. Closely allied is 

 also Desmidocrinus Angelin, which, however, has an additional 

 arm to each ray, with slight deviations in the arm-structure. 

 Whether this is sufficient for a separation from Garj^ocrinus, we 

 do not wish to decide, but it should clearl}^ be no more than 

 subgeneric. 



Pictet places Carpocrinus with Forbesiocrinus^ Taxocrinus^ 

 Graphiocriims, Lyriocrinus and ScypJwcrinus under the Garpo- 

 criniens; while D'Orbigny and Roemer connect it with the C^^atho- 

 crinidie. Austin combines Phoenicocrinus with Divierocrinus 

 and Tetramerocrinus under his Merocrinidje. 



