NO. 5 TERTIARY ECH1NOIDS FROM FLORIDA — KIER 53 



bottom of specimen; anterior poriferous zones slightly developed, 

 (pi. 18, fig. 5 ; text fig. 54) pore-pairs minute, 34 in posterior 

 poriferous zone of specimen 79 mm long, 31 in specimen 49 mm 

 long; petal straight, or curved anteriorly or posteriorly distally; pos- 

 terior petals V, I depressed in groove, short, extending slightly more 

 than half distance to margin, interporiferous zones very narrow, pores 

 strongly conjugate, 23 pore-pairs in poriferous zone of specimen 

 49 mm long, 30 in specimen 79 mm long. 



Periproct. — Transverse, situated high on posterior truncation. 



Peristome. — Very eccentric anteriorly, transverse, with well-de- 

 veloped lip. 



Fascioles. — Peripetalous fasciole at anterior very low, below mar- 

 gin, not visible adapically, passing around petals II, IV below ends 

 of petals, curving adapically very abruptly posterior to these petals, 

 extending toward apical system, then abruptly turning posteriorly 

 (text figs. 51-53), passing around end of petals V, I, then curving 

 anteriorly forming pronounced lobe, convex toward apical system, 

 in some specimens. Lateroanal fasciole originates from peripetalous 

 fasciole just posterior to petals II, IV, extending posteriorly slightly 

 adapical to margin in interambulacra 4, 1, passing adorally near 

 periproct, then forming distinct deep sulcus immediately adoral to 

 periproct; this sulcus a consistent character in species, occurring in 

 all 23 specimens in which this area visible. 



Phyllodes. — Phyllodes well developed, broad (text fig. 55), 4 or 

 5 pores in phyllode III, 7 or 8 in phyllodes II or IV, 5 or 6 in phyl- 

 lodes V or I ; numbers and position of pores quite consistent in all 

 specimens. 



Remarks. — The Florida specimens are clearly conspecific with 

 those described and illustrated by Cooke (1959, p. 74, pi. 31, figs. 

 1-8) from South Carolina. On first impression they do not appear 

 to be conspectific with Ravenel's holotype as figured by McCrady 

 (in Tuomey and Holmes, 1857, pi. 1, figs. 5-5b). Most of the 

 Florida specimens are larger and more inflated, but one specimen 

 (pi. 18, figs. 3, 4) is approximately the same size as the holotype 

 and can not be distinguished specifically. As shown in a height to 

 length graph (text fig. 58), there is a disproportionate increase in 

 height relative to length in the larger specimens. 



The specimen figured by Clark and Twitchell (1915, pi. 97, figs, 

 la-d) does not appear to belong to this species. I have studied this 

 specimen from the American Museum of Natural History. As it 

 is slightly crushed, its original shape is not certain, but it appears to 

 have been considerably higher than A. porifera. 



