128 ECHIXOIDKA. 1. 



No transverse series of small teeth. The ophicephalous and triphyllons pedicellariae withont conspicuons 

 peculiarities. The spicules of the globiferous pedicellariae are bihamate, those of the tube feet of a 

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

 side (PI. XXI. Fig. 32). — Parasaloiia Puhlii Pfeffer (314) I have not seen. 



In <: Revision of Echini p. 423 the family EchinometradcB is defined as .having always more 

 than three pairs of pores to each arc ■. nevertheless Parasalcnia 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 onh- the form and habitus of the test is taken into consideration by the deter- 

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

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

 with the Echinonietrid.s. The spicules remind most of those in Aiithocidaris^ but are, nevertheless, 

 very different also from these; also the globiferous pedicellariae recall those of Antliocidaris^ but are 

 distinguished from these by having no neck. Thus it is not too closeh' allied to Anihocidar/s, 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 ver}- different from that of the Echii/ui/ictra-s^iw&s (Mackintosh 265, Stewart 

 3811 is a further proof that Parasalcnia has nothing to do with Echinoriictra\ now, to be sure, we 

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

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

 will also get some importance. 



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

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



Eclmiostrcphitx violarc (Blv.). Also this peculiar form is well known, especial!}' Stewart (381) 

 has figured its pedicellariae with the exception of the triphyllons ones; accordingly only the most 

 important features are to be briefl}' mentioned here. A primary tubercle is found on all the ambn- 

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

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

 are thick and carr\- pedicellariae. No spines on the buccal plates; the gills with the usual irregular 

 fenestrated plates. The globiferous pedicellarite as in Echinomctra with one large, unpaired lateral 

 tooth. There is no neck; whether glands are found on the stalk could not be decided \\\\.\\ certaint)', 

 as the examined .siDccimen is a dried one. In the tridentate pedicellariae the blade is widened in a 

 somewhat spoon-shaped manner, rather strongly serrate in the edge in the outer part, withont trans- 

 verse series of small teeth; onl\- a little developed net of meshes. The ophicephalous and triphyllons 

 pedicellariu.' of the common form. The stalk of the pedicellariae compact. The spicules of tube feet 

 and pedicellariae bihamate. — Although this genus has most frequenth' trigeminate ]5ores, it is also 

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

 being as in Echinoinclra. — Er/i. pentagunus Yoshiw. (449I not examined. 



To the genus Echinoiin/ra are referred the species: lucmihr (L.)'), oblonga \^\\\ Alatlio'i (Blv.), 



') Loveii (252. p. 153) has dcfinitivtly shown tin- conimnn Westiiidian Echinomeira to be the Echinus /iicun/cr of 

 I.,inue; thus that species iimst keep the name, and the name of E.subangutaris (Leske) used by Agassiz (Rev. of Ech.) must 

 be rejected. The species from the Pacific for which Agassiz unjustly reserves the name of lucunler, must give up this name, and 

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



