OF KACHH AND KATTYWAK. 77 



The Coelopleurus is also a form believed to be Nummulitic by d'Archiac and 

 Haimej and is their species C. Forhesi. The specimen is less weathered than the type 

 of the species in the collection of the Geological Society ; but when it is compared with 

 one from the Miocene of Kattywar the results of the weathering and sand-scratching 

 can be appreciated. A moderately sized tubercle is on each of the generative plates, 

 yet it is hardly visible in the Kachh specimen, and not at all in the type. 



Coelopleurus Forbesi, d'Archiac, is essentially a Miocene form, and is found in great 

 abundance in the Gaj series of Sind. 



The genus Coelopleurus has a considerable range, and is found in the Nari 

 deposits of Sind, which are Oligocene in age. It occurs also in the Miocene of Sind 

 and Kattywar ; but the Nari species is not Coelopleurus Forhesi. Coelopleurus equis, 

 Agass., and C. Pratti, d'Archiac, are the Oligocene species, and C. Forbesi the Miocene 

 form. Alex. Agassiz has given beautiful representations of the Oriental Coelopleurus 

 Maillardi in his Eeport on the ' Challenger ' Echini, plate vi ; but our examination 

 shows that the Miocene form differs considerably in the shape of the apical plates and 

 in the details of the ambulacra. 



We have considered the generic position and structural details of the Temno- 

 pleuridse which are such characteristic fossils of the Miocene series of Kachh in dealing 

 with the species. The distinction of the closely allied species of Dictyopleurus of the 

 Nummulitic series of Sind from the beautiful Temnopleurids of Kachh is explained ; and 

 it is noticed that, notwithstanding the vigorous onslaught of d'Archiac and Haime 

 on Edward F or bes's genus Temnechinus, their own species of Temnopleurus must 

 come under it. Exception may be taken for Temnopleurus tuberculosus, d'Archiac, as 

 will be explained in noticing the Kattywar Echini, but we do not retain the genus 

 Opechinus, Desor. The anatomy of the test of Temnopleurus toreumaticus and of the 

 allied forms of Salmacis has been examined by one of us ; and the nature of a true 

 species of Temnopleurus has been established. The special structures are not found 

 in the forms called Temnopleurus Mousseaui, T. costatus, and T. Sookeri by d'Archiac ; 

 these are varieties of one species, which we refer to T. Bousseaui, but all are Temnechini. 

 The fact that in some full-grown specimens of Temnechinus Bousseaui there are no fos- 

 settes in the actinal half and very few elsewhere, is very suggestive. D'Archiac and 

 Haime were in fault in accrediting their species with a Nummulitic horizon. All have 

 been found by us in the Miocene of Kachh and Kattywar, and only one specimen came 

 from the Khirthar of Sind, and its appearance is against its being really found in place. 



Alex. Agassiz notices these species of d'Archiac and Haime in his ' Revision of 

 the Echini,' and came to the same conclusion which we adopt from the consideration 

 of the data before him in 1872-1874. He writes (p. 289) :— " D'Archiac and Haime 

 have figured from the Nummulitic formation of India a number of species which are 

 usually referred either to Temnopleurus or to Opechinus, which belong to this same 

 genus Temnechinus." We agree with this opinion after an examination of a great many 

 specimens ; and of course the only error in the statement is due to the mistake of 

 d'Archiac and Haime in placing the forms in the Nummulitic series. 



