’--on the other, methods. . 
is always absolutely indispensable; and this, 
~—618 
A firm financial basis 
we understand, the new department is to have 
in abundance. ‘The second requisite is equal- 
ly imperative. ‘The university just now men- 
tioned had abundant means; so had others 
before it: but it invoked new methods. ‘True, 
these seemed to some, at the outset, revolution- 
ary; but who can deny that they have been 
a success? It was because of this great im- 
portance of absolute freedom that some felt 
it to be safer for the new establishment in 
Philadelphia to steer clear of affiliations, how- 
ever exalted ; and it was for this reason alone. 
The advantages accruing to both the Universi- 
ty of Pennsylvania and the biological institute 
(or department), by union, are too obvious 
to need discussion; and both are to be con- 
gratulated, provided only that that liberty be 
granted which will insure the employment of 
the best methods. 
As to the exact line of work to be done, or 
the methods to be set going, we may safely 
trust to the discretion of the new faculty. 
Evidently, museum-work in the older sense, and 
elementary teaching by the older methods, may 
be neglected. And it will very likely be found 
true that great opportunities are embraced in the 
hunt for new methods of work, — in technique, 
—and especially in field-work at the sources 
of supply. The American mind is quick,.in- 
ventive, ingenious. Must it always go abroad 
to get new ‘points’? Let it, rather, come to 
prove its ingenuity by original biological meth- 
ods at home; then, with application of these 
at the sources of supply, —at the laboratory 
table, by the shores of the sea, by the river or 
the gulf, — we may solve those home problems 
which are most pressing. Itis not too much 
to say that the eyes of the biologists of Europe 
are upon us and upon our material. More- 
over, if, as is certain, the field is white for the 
harvest, need the reapers be few? or those 
few, Europeans? 
And let us by no means forget our greatest 
opportunity. In the variety of our environ- 
ments, and in the area of our country, we have 
conditions highly favorable for the study of 
‘those final broader physiological problems 
which must eventually be the key to life-science 
as a whole. We wish the new biological 
department every possible success. 
THE ENEMIES AND PARASITES OF 
THE OYSTER, PAST AND PRESENT. 
Amone the worst enemies of the oyster of 
our Atlantic coast are the star-fishes; and 
SCIENCE. 
[Vou. III, No. 68. 
great numbers of them are usually found upon 
all oyster-beds, where they are committing 
depredations upon the mollusks. Itis‘anin- | 
teresting fact, however, that the remains of 
star-fishes are rarely found in connection with 
fossil oysters of any age, not even with ter- 
tiary oysters. The oyster family culminated 
in the cretaceous period, as regards generic 
differentiation. ‘The abundance of individuals 
was also as great then as it has ever been 
since ; and it is often the case that the remains 
of oysters are found in great profusion in both 
cretaceous@and tertiary strata. The creta- 
ceous strata of Texas have furnished a great 
abundance of the Ostreidae of every generic 
and subgeneric form known upon this conti- 
nent; and yet, among all the many collec- 
tions of fossils from those rocks which I have 
examined, I have never seen a fragment of a 
star-fish, although echinoids in considerable 
variety are not uncommon. 
Star-fishes very closely related to those now 
living upon our coast have been reported by 
Forbes from Jurassic strata, and I have recog- 
nized a similar form from the Neocomian of 
Brazil; but we have no evidence that star- 
fishes of any kind were ever a serious enemy 
to the oyster before the present epoch. The 
ancient star-fishes, no doubt, had the same 
propensities that their modern representatives 
have ; but they seem not to have obtained that 
preponderance then which they have since ac- 
quired. 
Burrowing sponges similar to, if not identi- 
cal with, the living Cliona, are of very ancient 
origin. The fossil shells of the ostreid genera 
Exogyra and Gryphaea, as well as those of Os- 
trea proper, are as commonly and completely 
‘riddled’ by burrowing sponges as are any shells 
of the living oyster. Indeed, it is rare to find 
even a small collection of fossil oyster-shells 
free from such burrows. Other fossil shells 
besides those of the Ostreidae are found to 
have been thus infested, the burrows being in 
all respects the same as those which infest the 
oysters. 
Not only did Cliona exist abundantly with 
the Ostreidae of mesozoic time, but I have 
obtained evidence that it also existed in pale- 
ozoic time in essentially the same character 
that it has to-day. Several years ago I ob- 
tained from the Devonian strata of lowa some 
shells of the brachiopod genus Strophomena, 
which contain numerous Cliona-like burrows. 
These I submitted to Prof. A. E. Verrill, who 
informed me that in his opinion they are the 
‘borings of a species of Cliona. 
C. A. WHITE. 
