642 PROF. F. J. BELL ON THE GENUS PSOLUS. [Nov. 14, 
of Semper’s voyagings are among the chief treasures of zoological 
and anatomical literature. 
While this last-mentioned work was passing through the press, 
Emil Selenka selected a comprehensive revision of the known Holo- 
thuroidea as the subject of a philosophical dissertation for the docto- 
rate; to this and to the descriptions of Prof. Ludwig the student of 
German literature will always have recourse. 
In this, as in other divisions of the Radiata, the zoologist owes 
much to the long-continued researches of Professor Verrill, whose 
chief work on Holothurians was unfortunately, and strangely enough, 
progressing simultaneously with those of Semper and of Selenka. 
Coming at once to the genus Psolus, we find that some incon- 
venience has arisen from this simultaneous work ; for neither of the 
German naturalists was able to take any note of the formation by 
Verrill of two genera allied to Psolus; and we have not, therefore, 
their opinion on the value of the generic distinctions by means of 
which Lophothuria and Lissothuria are added to the Psoline sub- 
family—though we have, perhaps, some indication of Prof. Semper’s 
views in the remarks that he makes on the new genus Stolinus 
formed by Selenka. 
The Holothuroidea form no exception among animals; side by 
side with the study of their natural history we have, unfortunately, 
to make our way through that rapidly growing maze designated 
‘synonymy.’ I can see no advantage in retailing, at second hand, 
the references to earlier writers who have more or less correctly 
identified species, which references themselves are not without 
exception exact. I propose therefore to give for the sake of com- 
pleteness one, and probably the most suitable, reference for each 
species. 
In the first place, however, it will unfortunately be necessary to 
detail at length the history of a generic name which has attained 
almost as great a vogue as Psolus itself, and which has, even lately, 
been used in zoological literature. Prof. Studer (Monatsb. Ak. 
Berl. 1876, p. 452) doubtless, like myself (P. Z.S. 1881, p. 100), 
has used for Cuvierta antarctica the name by which that species is 
best known, without at the time entering upon a close bibliographical 
investigation. 
In the Animal Kingdom there are four claimants to the name 
Cuvieria ; but this, of course, is not by itself a reason why we should 
cease to make use of it for an Echinoderm. So far as I can discover, 
the first time that the name appeared in print in association with 
the Holothuroidea was in 1817 *, when Cuvier wrote, “ Celles que 
Péron avait nommées Cuviéries.” Péron, however, does not seem 
to have ever quite definitely made up his mind as to what genus or 
group should be dignified by association with the name of the illus- 
trious anatomist. Several years earlier he had applied the name to a 
Medusa (Voyage, Atlas, pl. xxx. fig. 2): a little later than this he 
published, in conjunction with Lesueur, a ‘Tableau des Méduses;’ and 
? Reégne Anim. iy. p. 22, note (1); and see pl. xv. fig. 9, where cwvieria is used 
as a specific name, 
