444 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM tol. 90 



adult outline is taken on early in life. Their habitat seems to have 

 been the same as the present members of this species, just under the 

 surface of the sand. 



Comparison of the fossil forms with the recent material in the 

 United States National Museum leaves no doubt as to the identity, 

 at least of the adults. As regards the smaller stages, these are 

 similar to the modem forms but seem somehow not very well differ- 

 entiated from Mellita except in the appearance of the lunules, those 

 in the Mellita appearing much earlier than those in the Encopes. 



The Mellita is not uncommon in the Pleistocene, and its occurrence 

 in the section here is not surprising. The Encope^ on the other 

 hand, does not now inhabit the present seas east of the Gulf of 

 Mexico and is not known from the Atlantic coast of North Amer- 

 ica; and has not been previously reported fossil. Hence, it is of 

 interest to report it from northern South Carolina and from Pleis- 

 tocene deposits. 



Fragments of either Mellita or Encope have been collected from 

 similar deposits as far north as Alligator Cut of the Inter-Coastal 

 Waterway in Hyde County, N. C, but so far I have been unable to 

 identify them definitely to genus and species; they appear to be 

 only Mellita. Definite specimens of Mellita occur in Carteret County, 

 N. C, on the spoil piles along the Inter-Coastal Waterway in Bruns- 

 wick County, N. C, near the "Sand Cut," but no definite specimens 

 of Encope have been found. Since no specimens or definite frag- 

 ments resembling Encope appear north of Cane Patch Bay, Myrtle 

 Beach, the northern extension of Encope michelini in the Pamlico 

 would seem to reach only to northern South Carolina. 



The description follows : 



Genus ENCOPE L. Agassiz 



Encope L. Agassiz, Monographie des scutelles, p. 45, 1841. 



ENCOPE MICHELINI L. Agassiz 



Plate 63, Figuues 1-8 ; Plate 64, Figures 1-6 ; Plate 65, Figubes 1-4, 6 



Encope michelini L. Agassiz, Monographie des scutelles, p. 58, pi. 6a, figs. 9, I 

 10, 1841.— A. Agassiz, Revision of the Echini, p. 329, pi. 12d. fig. 1, 1872.— 

 H. L. Clark, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 8, vol. 7, p. 599, 1911; Mem. Mus. 

 Comp. Zool., vol. 46, No. 1, p. 75, 1914; Papers Dept. Marine Biology, 

 Carnegie Inst. Washington, vol. 13, No. 3, p. 73, 1919 ; Sci. Surv. Porto Rico 

 and Virgin Islands, New York Acad. Sci., vol. 16, pt. 1, p. 87, 1983. — 

 Grant and Hebtlein, Publ. Univ. California at Los Angeles, Math, and 

 Phys. Sci., vol. 2, pp. 96, 99, 1938. 



Specimens somewhat pentagonal in outline, with the more nearly 

 straight portion posterior, anterior margin rounded and fairly thick, 



