BIOLOGY. (il, D, i—viii.) 
Echin. 45 
(275) p. 16 and pi.—Colour of deep-sea Hoi. and Crin., though 
bright, uniform; Shipley (279) p. 243. For Colour see also n, b, 
ii, c ; iii, b : c, v. 
d. Other protective Adaptations:—Vacant. 
vi. Locomotion :—(a) see also Loeb under n, c, vi ; Loeb (188).— 
(d) Mechanism of, in Ast .; Shipley & MacBride (280) pp. 242-244.— 
Asterias ; Mead (207) p. 204.—(e) Movement and locomotion in Oph .; 
Hamann (146) p. 884. 
vii. Autotomy and Regeneration:—Regeneration compared with 
development of half-blastulae; Morgan (211) pp. 953, 962, and (213) 
pp. 18, 228 et sqq.—In Echinoderms generally (pp. 105, 144), also in 
Hoi. (pp. 105, 145, 154), in Ast. (pp. 102, 153, 214), esp. Asterias 
vulgaris and Linckia multiformis , in Oph. (pp. 145, 153), in embryonic 
stages (pp. 18, 68, 228); Morgan (213).—Autotomy of Ophioderma 
and Luidia consequent on removal from water, process descr.: auto¬ 
tomy of both whole and eviscerated Antedon : reaction to fresh water 
of Echinus and Spliaerechinus which throw off pedicellariae, not 
so Arhacia ; Riggenbach (261).—Regeneration in Echinoderms gene¬ 
rally, esp. Hoi .; Morgan (210) p. 244.—In Colochirus, Stichopus, 
Synapta, Linckia (fig.), Asterias (fig.), popular; Entz (104) p. 10.— 
Fissiparity in Ast. perhaps connected with multiple madreporites; 
Davenport (83).—Experiments on power of regeneration of artificially 
divided Asterias; single arms do not regenerate, a portion of disc is 
required; possible for a single starfish to produce two after division, 
but exceedingly improbable that it could do so in natural surround¬ 
ings; Mead (207) p. 221.—Regeneration of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (?) arms 
in Asterias vulgaris ; Nelson (220) p. 255.—Regeneration in A. vul¬ 
garis, King’s experiments discussed; Morgan (210), p. 242.—Sup¬ 
posed regeneration of disc and rays from a single ray of Linckia 
guildingii; Clark (66).—Ditto in Linckia multiformis, Sarasin’s 
views criticised, a new starfish probably not formed from single arm; 
Morgan (210) p. 242.—Regeneration of eye of Astropecten and Echin- 
aster; Pfeffer (242) pp. 546, 547.—General account of autotomy 
and regeneration in Oph .; Hamann (146) p. 877.—In Amphiura sp., 
growth of all systems descr. and compared with embryonic develop¬ 
ment ; Dawydoff (84).—Experimental study of regeneration in An¬ 
tedon, also transplantation of disc; Przibram (249 & 250) pp. 334- 
340, 344. 
viii. Parasites and Commensals :—(a) Literature of Echinoderm 
commensals; Alcock (3) p. 44.—(b) Hoi. hosts of Sporozoa; Labb:e 
( 176) p. 134 .—Enclocolax a gastropod in Myriotrochus sp. nondescr. ; 
Ostergren (231): Kolthoff (174) p. ZlO.—Fierasfer homei in 
Stichopus , and Pinnoteres in cloaca of Mulleria ; Alcock (3) p. 44.— 
(c) Ech. hosts of Sporozoa ; Labbe (176) p. 133.—Parasites of Echinus 
esculentus, viz. Syndesmus echinorum, Oncholaimus echini ; Shipley 
( 278).—(d) Polychaete worm on interradii of Dictyaster xenophilus ; 
Alcock (3) p. 44.—(e) Parasites of Oph .; Hamann (146) p. 892.— 
(f) Polychaete worm and Galatheid crustacean with Antedon sp., and 
coloured like it; Alcock (3) p. 44 .—Myzostomum gigas on Antedon 
eschrichti; Kolthoff (174) p. 206 .—Myzostomida on Antarctic Crin., 
“it is interesting to note that the ancient form HyocEnus has a 
special genus of parasite unknown on other Crinoids...also...that 
von Graff regards this genus ‘ as undoubtedly the lowest form of the 
Myzostomida’.” [genus referred to is Stelechopus; but this was also 
found on Bathycr., moreover Hyocr. has no peculiar right to the 
epithet ‘ancient’]; Shipley (279) p. 254 .—Myzostomidae [assumed] 
