Crinoidea, Pentacrinidae. 23 
section and with crenelate or radiately ridged joint-faces. The diameter of the largest 
cirrus-facet is O°3 mm. 
It is possible that to larger columns of the same species we should assign, 
as cirri, some slender fragments also from Cserhat. These fragments, lettered a to f, 
are composed of elongate ossicles with small crenellae at the sutures. Some are 
slightly flattened. The average measurements in millimetres of the component 
ossicles are: 
a b C d ¢e Wp 
Diameter Le ii Pil 1°05 oO9 O99 
Height 115 li) Lee 1°46 14 & 1:0 09 
In a, b, d, and e, the sides of the ossicles are slightly concave; in c they 
are straight; in f, convex. In a and c, the sutures are very indistinct. In d there 
is a swelling half-way down each ossicle, suggesting that it consists of a fused 
pair; one of these swellings looks as though it were due to cirrus-facets, in which 
case the specimen would be a fragment of a small stem, not of a cirrus. 
There are two other fragments: one (g) a single ossicle, with diameter 1°9 mm. 
and height 3°3 mm. and convex sides; the other (1) composed ,of three ossicles, 
with diameter 1°65 mm. and height 2°5 mm. and very slightly concave sides These 
may possibly be fragments of cirri of an allied but larger species than that to 
which a—f belong. 
Relations of the Species. — The various fragments under discussion are 
too incomplete and too obscure to bear the weight of an independent specific, still 
less of a generic, name. This is not the place in which to discuss the systematic 
position of «Pentacrinus venustus», to which they appear allied. But | must express 
my conviction that, had Professor Lause troubled to examine Kuipstem’s types (Brit. 
Mus. 75860 a and b) he could never have referred them to Pentacrinus [i. e. Balano- 
crinus| laevigatus Mtnsrer. As I hope to prove elsewhere, there is scarcely any 
point of resemblance, beyond the cylindrical shape and smooth exterior of the 
-columnals. In fact neither «Pentacrinus venustus» nor the fragments herein described 
can be placed in the Pentacrininae as nowadays understood. They might belong 
to some otherwise undescribed species of Holocrinus. 
Supramity: PENTACRININAE. 
Pentacrininae BATHER, 1900, in «A Treatise on Zoology», ed. E. R. Lankester, vol. III, «The 
Echinodermas, p. 182. 
The genera included in this Subfamily are Pentacrinus BLuMEnBacH (syn. Extra- 
crinus Austin), Isocrinus Meyer (syn. Pentacrinus P. H. Carpenter), Balanocrinus 
Acassiz em. Loriot, Awmstinocrinus Loriot, and Metacrinus P. H. Carpenter. The 
Pentacrinine columnals found in Triassic rocks have hitherto been referred to Penta- 
crinus. That genus, however, as properly restricted, finds its earliest representative 
in P. versistellatus ScHaFHAutL, from the zone of Avicula contorta ; the type-specimens 
are in the Palaeontological Museum of Munich, where I have examined them. No 
species of that genus is known from the Balaton district. Some of the Triassic 
species, e. g. Pentacrinus subcrenatus and P. laevigatus, do not belong to Penta- 
