234 Messrs. R. Etlieritlge, Jun,, and P. H. Carpenter on 



liarities ; and the outline of tlie summit depends very consider- 

 ably upon tlie fiatness or arched character of the plates which 

 bear tliese ridges. In G. pyramidatus they are flat, broad, 

 and lanceolate, sharp in C. Whitei, and barely separating the 

 slits of adjacent interradii at their outer extremities. But 

 they become wider towards the mouth ; and their proximal 

 ends in this species and in C. alternatus bear small tubercles. 

 In the latter species the oral ridges project somewhat above 

 the general surface of the summit and slope inwards ; but in 

 C. pyraraidatus they are inclined outwards, and to a certain 

 extent also in C. HiudeL 



The radial sinuses are short in all the species, and usually 

 triangular. The anus is either rhombic, as in C. ■pyramidatus 

 and C. trihhatvSj or ovate {G. alternatus). The column 

 appears to have been circular and very small. 



Godaster difters from Pentrernites and Gra)tatocrinus in the 

 greater distinctness of the summit from the remainder of the 

 calyx, in the absence of spiracles and the presence of the 

 large interradial anal opening, in the reduction in the number 

 of the groups of hydrospires from ten to eight, owing to their 

 absence from the anal interradius, in this opening directly 

 to the exterior instead of being withdrawn beneath the ambu- 

 lacra, and, lastly, in the absence of hydrospire-pores. The 

 same characters also separate Godaster from Pentremitidca, 

 Sc//izobIastus, IVicoelocrinuSj and 2\oostocrinus. There is a 

 nearer affinity existing between Godaster and Phcenoschisma 

 in the exposure of the hydrospiral slits on the surface of the 

 calyx, and in the absence of dehnite spiracles ; but in the 

 latter genus the anal interradius is occupied by hydrospires, 

 and the outline of the calyx in the two genera is quite 

 different. 



Godaster was established by M^Coy as a Blastoid ; but 

 Mr. Rofe * regarded it as a connecting-link between the 

 Crinoidea and Cystoidea, Pentrernites being more closely 

 allied to the former, and Godaster to the latter. On the other 

 hand, Billingsf definitely referred it to the Cystoidea, because 

 there is no connexion between its hydrospires and the cavities 

 of the pinnulas borne on the ambulacra^ such as he assumed 

 to exist in Pentrernites. 



We c;innot learn that any other palaeontologist but Prof. 

 Zittel I has definitely adopted this view, which is far from 

 commending itself to us. If Godaster is a Cystoid, so are 



* Geol. Miig-. 18G5,ii. p. 251. 



t Ainer. .Jouni. Sc. IStiO, xhiii. p. 80. 



\ Handb. d. Pal, ISeO, Bd. i. Abth. I, p. 424. 



