70 THE VICTORIAN NATURALIST. 



NOTES ON SOME VICTORIAN ECHINOIDS. 

 By T. S. Hall, M.A. 



{Read before the Field Naturalists' CIvh of Victoria, Uth July, 1904.) 



Most of the Echinoids found in our seas have long been known 

 to science, but no one has attempted a Ust of the Victorian 

 species, and it is difficult to say what forms occur and what do 

 not. The museum of the Biological Department of the University- 

 has a certain amount of material, most of which was dredged 

 about Port Phillip Heads by the late Mr. J. Bracebridge Wilson, 

 M.A. It is, however, only a part of his gatherings, for the 

 remainder, and I believe the larger part, was sent to England 

 fourteen years ago to be identified, but the work has not yet been 

 accomplished. The collections of Echinoids in the National 

 Museum have not yet been found a permanent home, and are 

 still stored in packing cases in the basement. I have, con- 

 sequently, not been able to refer to them ; but, on the other hand, 

 without the free access to literature in the Museum library that 

 has been freely afforded me, I could have identified nothing with 

 certainty. 



Perhaps a few remarks on the literature of the group as a 

 whole, and on its Australian occurrences, will be of use. 



The " Revision of the Echini " by A. Agassiz, which contains 

 full descriptions and fine figures of nearly all the recent species, is 

 in the National Museum Library. The same author treated the 

 Challenge!- gatherings, and in both works our forms are, of course, 

 dealt with. Duncan's "Revision of the Genera and Great Groups 

 of the Echinoidea" will be found in the Journal of the Linnean 

 Society, London, vol. xxiii., 1891. In the same year the 

 Australian Museum published a catalogue of the Echini by Dr. 

 Ramsay. In 1889 Mr. T. Whitelegge's " List of the Invertebrate 

 Fauna of Port Jackson " appeared in the Journal of the Royal 

 Society of New South Wales. The Rev. J. E. Tenison Woods 

 wrote two or three short papers in the early volumes of the 

 Linnean Society of New South Wales. With these references it 

 will be easy to find one's way to the others. 



I have identified the following forms : — 



I. GoNiociDARis TUBARiA, Lamk. 



The differences between this species and G. geranioides, Lamk., 

 have not been very definitely expressed. Agassiz, in his Revision, 

 says they are easily discriminated by the structure of the primary 

 spines, the differences in the size of the genital plates and 

 abactinal system. In his Challenger volume he says spines count 

 for nothing in the Cidaridge. It is not easy to get any definite 

 statements by authorities on the size of the abactinal system and 

 the genital plates ; in fact, authors are nebulous on the matter. 

 M'Coy, in his " Prodromus," hazards the conjecture that the 



