264 A. E. Verrill—The Bermuda Islands; Coral Reefs. 
usually without distinct lines of spots, but with streaks of white, 
light orange or yellow at their bases, forming a nearly continuous 
discal zone ; inside of this is a zone of white radii, while the mouth 
is usually surrounded with light green. In some specimens there are 
inconspicuous ovate or roundish spots on the tentacles. The 
V-shaped dark markings of the disk are nearly or quite lacking. 
Bunodactis versus Cribrina. 
I do not agree with MeMurrich* in adopting Cribrina (Khr.) as a 
substitute for Bunodes or Bunodactis. 
Cribrina as established by Ehrenberg (1834) was a composite 
group, practically synonymous with Cerevs Oken, 1815, and there- 
fore should be dropped from the system. Moreover, the funda- 
mental generic character, as given by Ehrenberg, was the perfora- 
tion of the walls, as the vernacular name given by him also implied, 
“sieve anemones.” He included in it polypus Forsk., evidently 
the only species that he had personally studied, and added such 
other sagartians, like Metridiwm, Adamsia, etc., as were known to 
him to have perforated walls, and such, beyond doubt, should be 
considered his idea of the type.t 
* Report on the Hexactinie of the Columbia Univ. Exped. to Puget Sound 
during the summer of 1896. Annals N. Y. Acad. Science, xiv, No. 1, p. 14, 
May, 1901. 
+ Ehrenberg’s first species and two others belong to the Bunodes-group, it is 
true, but he had already established the genus Urticina, on a previous page, to 
include such forms, and his placing them in his Cribrina was an error due to 
misinterpretation of figures, mistaking verruce for pores. If Cribrina were to 
be adopted at all, it should be applied to a Sagartian genus—in place of Adamsia 
(1840) for instance, which would be a typical group, for three species of that 
genus were included by him (effeta, polypus, palliata). There is a rule of 
nomenclature generally adopted which forbids the restricting of a genus to a 
type that contradicts the original generic diagnosis. This has been done by 
MeMutrich, in this instance, as I understand it, and without any necessity, 
so far as priority is concerned. Moreover, another valid rule of nomenclature 
requires that the earliest restriction of the name of such a composite group (if 
not done contrary to obvious rules) shall hold good, as having priority. Now 
Cribrina had been thus restricted long before MeMurrich took it up (e. g. by 
Grubé, 1840), with bellis as a type, which was one of the species naméd by 
Ehrenberg and conforming to his definition. 
Professor Haddon (Revis. Brit. Actiniz, i, p. 323, 1889), also definitely 
restricted Cribrina to the Sagartian group, taking polypus Forsk. (=? effeta 
