99 
Phialocrinus, as originally proposed l)y tlie former, was established on very 
unsatisfactory and imperfect material, such as stem-joints, and is therefore 
quite inadmissahle. In this step Trantschold is followed by Messrs. 
AVachsmuth and Springer, who regard^ Phialocrinus, Trantschold, as a sid)- 
geniis of Gmphiocrinus, De Koninck^ Their remarks are as follows^ : — 
“ Closely related to GrapJdocrinns are Biu'sacrinus, Meek and AA’orthen, and 
Bhialocrinns, Trautsehold. M^e can perceive slight structural differences by 
which the two might be distinguislied from the first, 1)ut it can only he a suh- 
fjeneric division, and it is someAvhat questionable Avhether even tliis can Ijc 
maintained as to IPhicdocriuusB And agaiiff : — “ The resemblance to 
Graphiocrimis, as already mentioned, is so close that we doubt rvliether the 
group can he upheld eceu siih-yenerlcalhj . So far as known, Phialocrinus 
palens differs from GrapJiiocrhius, as now revised, only in having trvo 
brachial pieces instead of one, and in the under-basals, wliicli here project 
slightly beyond the column. The latter is unimportant, and a comparison 
Avill show that the two brachials combined have exactly the form of the 
single jAlate in Graphiocrinus ; their division involves no structural change, 
but merely facilitates articulation.” 
It is, therefore, clear that Phialocrinus is clearly related to Graphio- 
crinus, but it ajipears to me that further consideration of the characters of the 
former, aided by the structure of certain Australian Crinoids, will enable a 
separation to lie made. It may be remembered that the late Prof, do Koninck 
described a large Crinoid from our Permo-Caikoniferous as Cyathocrinus 
Koninchi, Clarke.'^ This is not congeneric Avith Cyathocrinus, but, ap- 
parently, Avith another and much larger Crinoid, described later as P. princeps, 
and discovered since Prof, de Koninck AATote, thus forming a A'ery natural 
group allied to P. patens, Trautsehold. To these may, perliaps, be added a 
third, of AAdiich only tlie calyx is known, and, possibly, a fourtli and somcAAdiat 
abnormal form. 
In Graphiocrinus, there is a single small anal plate situated half Avay 
betAA'cen the radials and the costals.'^ In Phialocrinus patens, Cyathocrinus 
Koninchi, and in at least tAvo of the new forms referred to above, the anal 
plate is Avedged betAveen two of the radials simply. In Graphiocrinus, this 
' Revision of tlie Palaiocrinoidea, Pt. I, 1879, p. 124. 
“ Rech. Ciinoicles Terr. Garb. Belgique, 1854, p. 114. 
3 Loc. elf., p. 122. 
* Ibid, p. 124. 
5 Foss. Pal. Nouv.-Galles du Sud, Pt. .3, 1887, p. 164, t. 6 f. 4. 
Revision of the Palieocrinoidea, Pt. I, 1879, p. 122 
