128 f.chinoidp;a. i. 



Nd transverse series of small teeth. The ophicephalous and triplnUous pedicellariæ witliout conspicuous 

 pecnliarities. The spicules of the globiferous pedicellariæ are bihamate, those of the tube feet of a 

 very peculiar form: biacerate, a little arcuate, with two small, axe-shaped jDrojections on the concave 

 side (PI. XXI. Fig. 32). — Parasalenia Pulilii Pfeffer (314) I have not seen. 



In « Revision of Echini- p. 423 the family Echinoinetradæ is defined as having always more 

 than three pairs of pores to each arc ; nevertheless Parasalenia is also referred to this family, 

 although it has only three pairs of pores in each arc. Setting aside this contradiction is must be 

 admitted that when only the form and habitus of the test is taken into con.sideration by the deter- 

 mination of the relationship of the Echinids, Parasalenia must be regarded as an oligopore Echino- 

 metrid. The examination of its pedicellariæ and spicules show, however, that it has no nearer relation 

 with tlie Echinometrids. The spicules remind most of those in Af/fhocidaris, but are, nevertheless, 

 very different also from these; also the globiferous pedicellariæ recall those of Anthocidaris, but are 

 distinguished from these by having no neck. Thus it is not too closely allied to Antliocidaris, but 

 it does not seem possible, at all events at present, to point out any nearer relation. That the struc- 

 ture of the spines is very different from that of the £cliiiio)iietra-s^mQs (Mackintosh 265, Stewart 

 381) is a further proof that Parasalenia has nothing to do with Ec/iinoiiictra\ now, to be sure, we 

 cannot lay an\- great stress on some difference in the structure of the spines, when this character is 

 standing alone; but when, as in Parasalenia, it is added to other characters of more significance, it 

 will also get some importance. 



After it has beeu pointed out that Parasalenia is no Echinometrid, this form becomes of con- 

 siderable interest as proving a parallel development within two different families. 



Echinostrephus molare (Blv.). Also this peculiar form is well known, cspecially Stewart (381) 

 has figured its pedicellariæ wåth the exception of the triphyllous ones; accordingl}- only the most 

 important features are to be briefh- mentioned here. A primary tubercle is found on all the ambu- 

 lacral piates; all the ocular piates are shut off from the periproct. The buccal membrane with rather 

 numerous fenestrated piates, not only opposite to the ambulacra (Rev. of Ech. p. 457); most of them 

 are thick and carry pedicellariæ. No .sjjines on the buccal piates; the gills with tlie usual irregular 

 fenestrated piates. The globiferous pedicellariæ as in EeJii)ioinefra with one large, unpaired lateral 

 tooth. There is no neck; whether glands are found on the stalk could not be decided with certaint_\-, 

 as the examined specimen is a dried one. In the tridentate pedicellariæ the blade is widened in a 

 somewhat .spoon-shaped manner, rather strongly serrate in the edge in the outer part, witliout tran.s- 

 verse series of small teeth; only a little developed net of meshes. The ophicephalous and triph}llous 

 pedicellariæ of the connnon form. The stalk of the pedicellariæ compact. The spicules of tube feet 

 and pedicellariæ bihamate. — Although this genus has most frequently trigeminate pores, it is also 

 referred to Echinoinetradæ in Rev. of Ech. ; this is no doubt correct, both spicules and pedicellariæ 

 being as in Echinoii/elra. — Ec/i. fentagunns Yoshiw. (449) not examined. 



To the genus Ecliinoiuefra are referred the species: lue 11 nier (L.)'), oblonga (Blv.), Alatliæi (Blv.), 



') Loven (252. p. 153) has definitively showii the comnion Westindian Ecliinometra to be the Echinus lucnnter of 

 Liiiiié; thus that species must keep the name, and the name of B.subaiigularis (Leske) used by Agassiz (Rev. of Ech.) must 

 be rejected. The species from the Pacific for which .\gassiz unjiistly reserves the name of lucunter, must give up this name, and 

 in future be called Echinometra Mathæi (Blv.), which name thus, according to Agassiz (Rev. p. 115), becomes the older one. 



