ACTINIARIA 



Under such circumstances it seems difficult to me to understand that it would be wrong, from a classificatory 

 point of view, to comprehend all families without basilar muscles in a large unity and all with basilar muscles 

 in another. The absence of the basilar muscles is namely, as shown by me, a primitive character occurring 

 only in lower Actiniaria, and moreover it is characteristic of theZoantharia(s.str.) andMadreporaria.theAntho- 

 zoa, to which the Actiniaria are most nearly related. In those groups there is no real pedal disc but rather 

 a basal plate of exactly the same nature as in Protanthea and Octineon. Thus as we find that several families 

 are devoid of basilar muscles, while others have such, and as furthermore this lacking of basilar muscles is 

 a primitive character which they have in common with Zoantharia and Madreporaria, the basilar muscles 

 appearing only in the more differentiated Actiniaria, I cannot see that there is any ostensible reason against 

 dividing the Nynactininae into Athenaria and Thenaria (Abasilaria and Basilaria). It would, of course, be 

 different, if it was to be proved that forms without as well as with basilar muscles appeared in one family. 

 In a single case genera without, and some with basilar muscles have in fact been referred to one family, namely 

 the Aliciidae. In my opinion such a classification is not well founded, and the family is heterogeneous, as I 

 have already stated (1900 p. 96) and will further discuss later on. The objection by Poche (1914 p. 96) 

 that circumstances in the family Aliciidae prove the groups Athenaria Thenaria to be untenable, is invalid. 

 His other objection to my classification is no better; he namely writes: "Die Einwendungen Me. Murrich's 

 gegen die Unterscheidungen der Abteilungen Athenaria und Thenaria, die im Wesentlichen auf das Fehlen 

 bezw. Vorhandensein der Basilarmuskeln gegriindet ist, hat Carlgren allerdings zum Teil in befriedigender 

 Weise widerlegt. So wird man seiner Bekampfung der von Me. Murrich behaupteten Homologien der 

 Basilar- mit den Parietalmuskeln gewiss beistimmen, ebenso seiner Zurtickweisung des auf Haloclava und 

 Eloactis gegriindeten Einwandes. Unwiderlegt bleibt aber der Einwurf betreffs der nahen Zusammenstellung 

 von Edwardsia und Halcampa einerseits, mit Ilyanthus andererseits." As far as I understand, Me. Murrich 

 in his paper (1904 p. 221) does not make any manifest objection especially to the placing of Ilyanthus near 

 the Edwardsiidae, and even if he does object, I do not see his reason for it, Ilyanthus being no more a Thena- 

 rian than Haloclava and Eloactis, but really an Athenarian. The occurrence of a rather well-developed, 

 endodermal sphincter in Ilyanthus, in contradistinction to the weak, endodermal muscles in Edwardsia 

 forming no sphincter, does not speak against the classification proposed by myself. The nature of the sphincter 

 is namely at most a family character. Me. Murrich wrongly refers Halcampa with its mesogloeal 

 sphincter to the Edwardsiidae, and Oractis wlu'ch is provided with a well-developed endodermal sphincter, 

 together with the sphincter-lacking Protanthea and Gonactinia to the Gonactiniidae. 



If thus the establishment of the groups of Athenaria and Thenaria is well founded, it remains to 

 make clear the extent of the different families which would have to be placed in the former group. The 

 classification of the Actiniaria, lacking a pedal disc, varies considerably according to the different authors, 

 in as much as some of them discern only one, others few or several families. The previous authors, such as 

 Milne-Edwards (1857), Gosse (1858), Hincks (1861), Verrill (1864, 1868), Klunzinger (1877), Studer 

 (1879), Andres (1880) place all genera those afterwards discovered I of course leave out of consideration 

 - together in a single section or family Actinines pivotantes sc. Ilyanthidae. A later author, Faurot (1895) 

 also uses the former term. Only in 1880 Andres distinguishes the Edwardsiidae as a separate family 



The Ingolf-Expcdition. V. 9. 



