420 Scientific Intelligence. 



stant, so that there is no longer any reason lor distinguishing the 

 two even as varieties, yet M. Perrier not only keeps them distinct, 

 as two species, but names another slight variation as a distinct 

 variety of A. arenicola. 



There is now little doubt in my mind that A. vulgaris will 

 prove to be identical with A. violaceus of Northern Europe, and 

 that the latter may be, as many believe, a mere variety (or sexual 

 form) of A. rube/is. But M. Perrier considers these distinct species, 

 though with some doubt as to A. violaceus. 



That, in other cases, he has admitted, as valid species oi Aster ias, 

 forms that are scarcely varietal is very probable, judging from 

 his descriptions alone, for the distinctive characters that he gives 

 are frequently those that are most apt to be variable. He has 

 described a single dry Labrador specimen of A. polaris (from 

 Dr. Packard's collection) as a new species under the name of A. 

 borealis. But among a large number of fresh specimens observed 

 by me at Anticosti Island, there were various forms intermediate 

 between his specimen and what he regards as the typical A. 

 polaris from Greenland. Moreover, the several Labrador speci- 

 mens that I have examined, collected by Dr. Packard at the same 

 time with the one now described as .1. borealis, show great varia- 

 tions in the form of the spines, len^^th of arms, and number of pedi- 

 cellarige, — characters that M. Perrier regards as distinctive in this 

 case. Therefore there is good reason to believe that his A. borealis 

 is only a form of .1. polaris, to which American zoologists have 

 hitherto referred it. 



Throughout the paper there are numerous typographical errors, 

 many of them due to imperfect proof-reading, but others i " 

 -mportant are due to careless refe ' "^' '^^ ' 



of other 



writers, especially those in English. " Contributions to the 

 Zoology of Yale College " is scarcely a legitimate substitute for 

 the " Contributions to Zoology from the Museum of Yale College," 

 published in this Journal. The locality, Eastport, Maine, is once 

 given as "East Port (Massachusetts,)" and once as "East Port, 

 (Canada.)" 



In one respect the nomenclature adopted, in some cases, by Ji. 

 Perrier is very objectionable, for he attempts to restore some ot 

 the ante-Linnsean "names" of species used in 1733 by Linck, who 

 was not, in any sense, a binomial writer, and whose polynomial 

 (or accidentally binomial) phrases can have no claim to priority, 

 as specific names, under the binomial system. 



5. HoickeVs theory {Alloeogenesis) of the genetic connection be- 

 tween the GeryonidcB and uEginidce.— In the Proceedings of the 

 Elliot Society for 185V, McCrady gave a very interesting account 

 of the commensalism of the young brood of a Cunina and of Tur- 

 ritopsis. No notice was taken of this remarkable mode of devel- 

 opment, McCrady's observations having been discredited by the 

 later publication (1865) of a magnificently illustrated memoir on 

 the " Kflssel-quallen " by HiBckel. The startling hypothesis of the 

 genetic connection between the Geryonid® and ^ginidse contamea 



