Bibliographical Notices. 407 



muth and Springer, the first section of which was reviewed in the 

 March number of this magazine. 



The whole work is one of the utmost value to all palaeontologists, 

 and will be a lasting monument of patient and persevering industry 

 on the part of the authors during a period of some eight or nine 

 years. They now recognize 156 genera of Palteocrinoids, which 

 include 127G species ; but they express their belief, which most 

 paUeontologists will share, that there are still many synonyms to 

 be worked out. On the other hand, they describe themselves as 

 possessing not less than 100 new species, and avc are very glad to 

 hear that these " will be described and amply illustrated hereafter 

 in a Monograph on the Pulieocrinoidea of North America." We 

 trust that the appearance of this monograph, will not be too long 

 delayed, and that it will contain tables or keys which will display 

 the authors' views as to the mutual relations of the various families 

 and genera of Pal;eocrinoids, including also the forty-nine non- Ame- 

 rican genera. Tables of this kind are of more use to the average 

 worker than the most elaborate descriptions, and they have the 

 additional advantage of informing the specialist as to the particular 

 structural differences on which the authors rely as characters of 

 systematic value. 



This concluding section of the ' E,evision.' commences with an ac- 

 count of the suborder " Articulata," which comprises the two 

 families Ichthyocrinidie and Crotalocrinidce, together with the pro- 

 blematical genus Chiocriitvs, killings. We suspect, however, for 

 reasons given on a previous page *, that whatever be the fate of 

 Chiocrinus, the Crotalocrinidse will eventually have to be removed 

 from their present association with the Ichthyocrinidte, though we 

 should not like to say where their ultimate resting-place will be. 



The suborder " Inadunata " falls into the two branches, Larvi- 

 formia and Fistulata. The former contains the four families Haplo- 

 crinidap, Symbathocrinidse, Cupressocriuidse, and Gasterocomidte ; 

 and the authors say of the whole group that they " probably pos- 

 sessed hydrospires and hydrospire pores, to connect with the 

 ambulacra" (p. 157). This may perhaps have been the case in 

 Cupressocnnus, but we cannot help thinking this statement to be a 

 very rash one as regards the embryonic forms Allagecrinus and 

 HaplocrhiKS. When the former genus was established in 1881 f it 

 was made the type of a separate family, distinguished from the 

 Haplocrinidae by " the inequality in the size of the radials, owing 

 to some of them being axillary," and the family AUagecrinidie has 

 since been accepted by De Loriol. So far as we are aware there 

 is no other Crinoid known in which the first radials may bo axil- 

 lary ; but Wachsmuth and Springer seem to consider this point 

 so unimportant that they make no reference to it whatever outside 

 their generic diagnosis of Allagecrinus. They describe the ventral 

 pyramid above the mouth of this type as consisting of anchylosed 



* Anted, pp. 397-406. 



t Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 1881, ser.5, vol. vii. p. 292. 



28* 



