218 Cincinnati Soctety of Natural History. 
crinus gracilis, is a synonym for the species which I had described 
under the name of Glyptocrinus angularis. 
There remain for disposition, without including the new ones herein 
described, twenty-two species, as follows: G. angularis, G. argutus, 
G. baeri, G. cognatus, G. decadactylus, G. -dyeri, G. fimbriatus, G. 
fornshelli, G. harrisi, G. miamiensis, G. nealli, G. ornatus, G. parvus, 
G. pattersoni, G. priscus, G. ramulosus, G. richardsoni, G. sculptus, 
G. shaffert, G. shafferi var. germanus, G. subglobosus, and G. sub- 
nodosus. 
None of these are known to have attached to other objects, by a 
flattened base or by roots, while some had columns that tapered to a 
point, and are not unfrequently found coiled around other columns, 
but they are considered, nevertheless, free crinoids. The columns have a 
pentagonal central canal, the arms bear pinnules, and there is some 
general resemblance in other parts, but no agreement which will per- — 
mit them to be referred to the same genus. 
The question that now arises is, what characters shall be regarded 
as of generic importance? In determinixg this, reliance will be placed 
upon this assemblage of crinoids, without undertaking to lay down 
rules of universal application. 
The presence or absence of subradial* plates is regarded of special 
generic importance, because no two species <liffering in this respect 
are very nearly allied in others, and because, in each species, whether 
the specimens are large or small, this part of the calyx is stable, ex- 
cepting, alone, the regular enlargement by growth. 
The presence or absence of secondary radials seems, too, to be of 
generic importance, because their presence doubles the number of am- 
bulacral furrows that penetrate the body, and materially heightens and 
changes the vault. 
* Some genera of crinoids have a single ring of plates between the column and the first 
radials, others have two rings. Most American authors, and I migkt say all, until quite 
recently, have called the plates, in the first ring above the column, the basals, and when the 
second exists they have called them subradials. Certainly no names can be easier or more 
expressive. I have, usually, followed this nomenclature, and shall do so in this article. 
The plates of the second ring have been called ‘“‘ parabasals’’ by some European authors: 
More recently some have called the plates of the second ring the basals, and those of the 
first ring the under basals. In other words, if only one ring exists the plates are called 
basals, but if two rings exist the plates of the first ring are called under basals. and those of 
the second, basals. This has given rise to the expression in describing species, ‘‘under basals, 
obsolete,’’ which every one must concede is ridiculous. The policy of changing the nomen- 
clature may well be doubted, and ought not to be entered upon without the clearest convic- 
tion, that, by so doing, error of some kind is being eradicated. The claim is made. that the 
change will bring the nomenclature used in defining recent crinoids in uniformity with that 
used in describing fossils, but as long as this is doubted, it is better to adhere to the estab- 
lished or preyaling methods of description. 
