ZOOLOGY AND BOTANY, MICROSCOPY, ETC. 
85 
Echinoderma. 
Upper Silurian Palaechinus.* — Mr. J. Mitchell notes that the oc- 
currence of Echinoids in Palaeozoic rocks is extremely rare, and that 
some palaeontologists doubt whether their occurrence in Silurian rocks 
has been satisfactorily established. He therefore describes, from the 
Upper Silurian of New South Wales, a fragment of a middle part of an 
inter-ambulacral area of Palsechinus sp. 
Fossil Echinoids.f — M. P. de Loriol describes a collection of sea- 
urchins from Lebanon. The collection includes ten new species. 
Ccelentera. 
Development of Scyphopolypes. J — Herr A. Goette, under this head- 
ing, publishes an important paper, whose contents may be conveniently 
considered under three heads : — (1) Observations on the development of 
certain Scyphopolypes (Anthozoa); (2) discussion of the principles of 
classification ; (3) genealogy of the Ccelentera. Under the first heading 
we have an account, based both upon the author’s own researches and 
on those of others, of the development of the Cereanthidce, of Cereactis 
aurantiaca , and of other Actinias. The result is to show that in the 
Actiniae certain peristomial pockets occur which are apparently homo- 
logous with the Septaltrichter of the Scyphistoma and the lower Scypho- 
medusae. Further, in several not nearly related Scyphopolypes it 
is found that the region of gastric pockets and septa is the same as in 
the Scyphistoma. In general, therefore, the research confirms the 
author’s views as to the relation of Scyphomedusae and Anthozoa, and 
makes it probable that the ancestor of both was a polypoid Scyphistome. 
Under the second heading the author has some interesting observations 
on what he calls the antithesis between genealogy and classification. He 
points out that, as a “ natural ” classification is merely an expression of 
ignorance, the effect of advancing knowledge must always be to shake 
rather than to strengthen it. It is obvious that if any group were com- 
pletely worked out, and all its members past and present described, a 
classification would be no longer possible. Starting, therefore, from 
this conception of classification as dependent rather upon practical con- 
venience than upon the known facts of phylogeny, the author proceeds 
to explain his views of the inter-relations of the Ccelentera, while re- 
fraining from expressing any opinion as to the desirability of making 
marked changes in the present classification in accordance with these 
views. His views are best explained by the genealogical tree which he 
constructs (see overleaf). 
The points of importance are the removal of the Hydrozoa from the 
primitive position usually assigned to them, the position of the Cteno- 
phora, and the separation of the Antipathidse and Cereanthus from the 
other Hexacorallia. The letter x marks the position of other probable 
derivatives of the tetraradiate form ; Tetraciis should perhaps be placed 
here. 
* Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., xxii. (1897) pp. 258-9 (I fig.), 
t Rev. Suisse Zoob, v. (1897) pp. 141-78 (3 pis.), 
j Zeitschr. wiss. Zool., lxiii. (1897) pp. 292-378 (4 pis. and 25 figs.). 
