1882. | CLASSIFICATION OF THE COMATUL&. 737 
of Ant. rosacea and Ant. eschrichti, or with the second brachials of 
Act. fimbriata and Act. multiradiata. 
In the case of Act. typica, the employment of a shorthand has 
been carried to such an extent by Prof. Bell, that he only makes pro- 
vision for 20 out of the 80 or more arms that the species possesses. 
The P which is inserted into the formula for Act. nove-guinee is 
here omitted, and only two of the axillaries taken into consideration 
at all. Nevertheless the rays have been described by myself as 
dividing seven or eight times; i.e. there may be no less than five 
axillaries beyond the palmars, all united by syzygy to the preceding 
joints as the palmar axillaries are ; while Lovén' has figured a spe- 
cimen with two axillaries beyond the palmars and has described the 
species as having 80 arms. Prof. Bell’s formula, however, (1A'RD®) 
takes no account of any palmars at all, much less of any thing beyond 
them, although Lovén says “ Rami secundi quatuor, bina paria, 
e brachialibus duobus,” and goes on to speak of rami tertii, quarti, and 
quinti; but the presence of the D and nothing more in Prof. Bell’s 
formula indicates that the total number of arms is never more than 
20 and may be only 11! 
It will be evident from the classification detailed above, that the 
essential character common to all the seven species of group B is 
the union of the second and third radials by ligaments and not by a 
syzygy asin the three species of group A. Nevertheless five of 
the seven formulz given by Prof. Bell contain an R, which denotes 
that the radial axillary “is a syzygy.” He surely cannot imagine 
that the radial axillaries which are united by ligament to the second 
radials are themselves syzygial joints as the distichal axillaries are. 
I have described the form of the axillaries in each of these five 
species, but have not said one word about their being syzygial joints. 
Such a condition, i. e. syzygial axillaries united by ligaments to the 
second radials, occurs in no Comatula with which I am acquainted. 
Neither are the axillaries united to the second radials by syzygy, 
as in Act. solaris and the other species of Group A, the formule 
for all of which contain an R. It is therefore difficult to understand 
why the formule for five of the species of group B should contain 
an R which is absent from those of the two remaining species. I 
can think of no reason for this except that in the diagnoses of these 
five species I have spoken of the “first ray-division” as consisting 
of three joints, the axillary with a syzygy. Prof. Bell, who appears 
to consider the primary number of rays as 10, and not five, as de- 
scribed by Miller and myself, has perhaps understood the term 
‘*first ray-division” to mean the five undivided rays themselves, 
which consist of the first, second, and third (axillary) radials. I 
had hoped that this expression coming immediately after the state- 
ment “the rays (in the Miillerian sense) dividing” 2, 3, or more 
times, and preceded by the description of the radial axillary where 
the division occurs, would be interpreted as meaning the ten primary 
arms which are borne by the axillaries and are themselves con- 
1 Ofy. af. K. Vet.-Akad. Forh, 1866, p. 230. 
49* 
