PALEONTOLOGY. '397 



forward little of any scientific value in elucidation of the 

 phylogeny of this diversified group of forms. Fossil Annelid 

 types have been frequently identified and described, and there 

 are impressions or cavities of problematical origin which occur 

 widely distributed in certain Palaeozoic deposits, chiefly in 

 Cambrian strata and in the Flysch (Cretaceous-Oligocene) 

 deposits of the Alps, which have been explained by many 

 authors as the paths of worms. Nathorst, however, is of 

 opinion that these cannot be identified with any certainty, 

 but may with equal right be regarded as traces of Crustacea, 

 Mollusca, Annelids, or other organisms. More reliable evi- 

 dences of fossil Annelids are supplied by the occurrence of 

 fossil Eunicites in the Tertiary deposits at Monte Bolca and 

 in the lithographic shales of Solenhofen. These fossil Nereids 

 are fully described in the works of Massalonga and Ehlers. 

 G. J. Hinde has described numerous jaw parts of Annelids 

 from Palaeozoic formations ; Hinde points out that, as Zittel 

 and Rohon had shown, these Annelid remains are partly 

 identical with the Conodonts which were regarded by Charles 

 Pander as fish-teeth. 



Molluscoidea. In 1830 Vaughan Thomson discerned the 

 colonial habit of certain small marine organisms which by 

 repeated budding gave origin to the growths popularly termed 

 Sea-mats or Sea-moss. Thomson proposed the name of 

 Polyzoa for the group and compared it with acephalous Mol- 

 lusca. Ehrenberg in 1834 substituted the name of Bryozoa 

 for the same group. Much later, in 1850, Milne-Edwards 

 united the Bryozoa, Brachiopoda, and Tunicata as one group 

 under the name of Molluscoidea, and assigned to it a rank 

 equal with that of the group of Mollusca. Since then the 

 Tunicates have been recognised as an aberrant branch of 

 Vertebrates, but further researches have only corroborated 

 the probable consanguinity of Bryozoa and the Brachiopoda, 

 while also removing these allies from their supposed connec- 

 tion with the group Mollusca. Fossil Bryozoa were described 

 by Lamouroux, Goldfuss, Lonsdale, and Michelin. In 1850 

 D'Orbigny, in reviewing the group, tried to separate the fossil 

 and living forms and to make a systematic sub-division accord- 

 ingly into two orders (Bryozoaires celluline's et centrifugines). 

 D'Orbigny's classification is quite artificial; features of sub- 

 ordinate significance are applied as the basis of genera and 



