F. B. Meek—Fossils of the Illinois Geological Report. 875 
Mr. Lyon as the true basal pieces, in the Blastoidea, but which 
we have viewed as belonging more properly to the column, 
view of a young ©. stelliformis, it will be seen that this part is 
composed of anchylosed upper disc-pieces of the column, 
divided longitudinally by three sutures, coincident with those 
between what we regard as the true basals above. The engrav. 
ing makes the divisions between the discs too distinct, but they 
are well enough defined in the specimen to show their true 
nature, 
belongs to an entirely distinct genus, the ambulacra of Lepido- 
centrus being (as shown in Dr. Shultze’s figure) each sit ain 
of only two ranges of widely different pieces, as in Palwechinus. 
Consequently, in republishing the description of our type, we 
have adopted the name Phokdocidaris for it. ee 
n this connection, it may be worthy of note, that it is evident 
from Dr. Shultze’s figures that Lepidocentrus Miiller, 1856, and 
pidechinus Hall, 1861, are in all respects congeneric; and, as 
Miiller’s name has priority of date, it will have to be retained 
for the group; thus making Lepidechinus a synonym. Conse- 
quently, the names of the American species, Lepidechinus tinbri- 
catws Hall and Lepidechinus rarispinus Hall, will have to be 
Written Lepidocentrus imbricatus and Lepidocentrus rarispinus. 
f Pentremites ( Troostocrinus ?) Woodmani M. and W. ; plate Xv1, 
88. dn, b, ¢, d—In describing this fine species, we 10 vertently 
omitted to mention that the central pit seen in the base was 
Ps left by the accidental removal of = o~_ we have 
, 4 the supplementary basal pieces, in other types of th 
Pastoidea. (See the fopknat om page 464, already cited in 
b &é notes, in connection with Codonites slelliformis, as illustrated 
Y fig. 5a, pl. IX ) 
jatigutes 4c, d, ¢ should have been 9¢, d, ¢, in the explanations of the plate. 
Jour, pe Terme Senmae, Vou. VII, No. 40.—APRIL, 1874. 
* 
