BIHANfi TILL K. SV. VET.-AKAD. HANDL. BAND 13. AFD. IV. N:0 5. 79 



along with it that to Scilla ^), who gives a far too indefinite 

 figiire of some fossil form. If now, after tliis, the description 

 given bj Lamarck is dtily considered, it cannot be overlooked 

 that, while with regard to eveiy species really belonging to 

 Tripneustes Ag., namely the E. ventricosus, E. virgatiis, E. 

 pentagonus, he concerning the zonge poriferse uses the term: 

 >^fasciis triplicibiis divisis>^, and of one alone, the E. subcEeru- 

 leus, the term :>subtriplicibus», he says with regard to the E. 

 sardicus: fasciis porosis rectis, pororum paribus transverse 

 ternis», which may as readily be uuderstood in accordance 

 with the disposition of the pores in Echinus proper: in trans- 

 versely ascending rows of three pairs. If this interpretation 

 is accepted, it follows that Lamarck must be acqiiitted of 

 having attached the appellation: Sardinian to an inhabitant of 

 tropical seas; that his E. sardicus is not a Tripneustes; and 

 that Agassiz was right in his first statement, that the La- 

 marckiau species: Echinus sardicus, E. melo and E. acutus 

 were all three described from specimens from the Mcditerra- 

 nean, and that they belong to the group of Echini, which 

 besides these comprises the E. elegans and E. norvegicus of 

 DtJBEN et Koren, the E. rarispinus and E. depressus of G. O. 

 Särs, the E. gracilis of Al. Agassiz, the E. microstomus of 

 Wyv. Thomson, all distribnted in the Xorth Atlantic and the 

 Mediterranean, and excessively difficult to distinguish by stable 

 characters. 



') Corp. mar. p. 58, t. 13, fig. 1. 



-«.•*?<=:* 



,^^: A *.:2.v^v^ 



