REPORT ON THE HEXACTINL^ 15 



('99). The genus Bunodella established by Verrill ('99, p. 43) 

 has already been withdrawn by him ('99, p. 146) and need not 

 be considered here, and the genus Evactis, also established by 

 Verrill, is discussed later, and I need merely state here that after 

 an examination of the type species, E. artemisia, Pickering, I 

 see no reason for regarding it as distinct from Cribrina. 



In 1834 Ehrenberg established a subgenus Urticina with the 

 A. a^assicomis of Miiller as the type and later Gosse ('58) estab- 

 lished for the same form the genus Tealia. The priority of 

 Ehrenberg's term is generally admitted and consequently the 

 use of Hertwig's name Tealiidae for the family is inadmissible 

 since Tealia is a nomen delendum. 



I shall have occasion later to discuss another group of 

 generic terms namely Anthopleura Duch. & Mich., Aulactinia 

 Verrill, /Egeon Gosse and Bunodosoma Verrill, and may state 

 here simply my belief that they cannot be separated but must 

 all be included under the title Anthopleura. 



The genus Phymactis M. Edw. ('57) has usually been re- 

 garded as a Cribrinid (Bunodid), Haddon, I believe, being the 

 first to suggest that it might possibly be more correctly referred 

 to the family Aliciidae. Carlgren in a recent paper ('99) has 

 published the result of his studies of P. clematis (Drayton), of 

 which he finds Milne-Edwards' type species P. florida (Drayton) 

 to be a synonym, and shows that Haddon was correct in his 

 suggestion. I may add that I can confirm Carlgren's conclu- 

 sions both as to the reference of the genus to the Aliciidae and 

 as to the synonymy of the two species mentioned, but may 

 point out that one species, P. cavernata, which in the past has 

 generally been referred to the genus Phymactis, must be re- 

 moved from this genus and referred to Anthopleura. Verrill 

 has practically already ('99) made the transfer, since he has in- 

 cluded the species in his genus Bunodosoma. 



With regard to the remaining genera which have been re- 

 ferred to the family little may be said, as for the most part too little 

 is known of them to allow of certainty as to their true positions. 

 I have already ('97) suggested the reference of Gyractis Boveri, 

 to the Bunodidae a suggestion which has been accepted by 



