ECHIN01DEA. (IV, C.) 
Echiii. 71 
Roem., v. M. fastigatus : of Stolley non Lam. = M. fastigatus ; Lambert 
in Grossouvre (116) p. 965 : distinguished from M. fastigatus ; Peron 
( 219) p. 517: from Hainaut is doubtful; Lambert in Grossouvre 
( 116) p. 302. M. glyphus ; Wollemann (301): the French form 
probably var. of M. brongniarti ; Grossouvre (116) p. 19: of Stolley, 
1891, does not —M. glyphus of either Cotteau or Schlueter, but 
approaches M. schloenbachi ; Lambert in Grossouvre (116) p.965. 
M. gottschei Stolley, probably a large M. schroderi ; op. cit. p. 966: of 
Font-de-Jarrier (Alpes-maritimes) incl. M. brongniarti var. sismondae 
Lamb., M. pseudoglypirns Grossouvre, and perhaps M. schroederi 
Stolley; Peron (219) p. 533. M. haasi Stolley, syn. of M. brongniarti ; 
Lambert in Grossouvre (116) p. 966. M. icaunensis; Peron (219) 
p. 517. M. idae maintained as a Micraster , not to be confounded 
with a Brissopsis ; Lambert in Grossouvre (116) p. 966: holotype in 
Ecole des Mines, Paris, compared with M. maestrichtensis , distin¬ 
guished from Brissopsis cretacea (= Diplodetus cretaceus ); Lambert 
( 163) p. 124. M. integer d’Orb. “ une creation artilicielle,” therefore 
no constituent of Isopneustes; loc. cit. M. laxoporus\ Grossouvre 
( 116) p. 17. M. cf. laxoporus ; Semenow (258) p. 15, pi. i. M. leskei \ 
Hill (130): Peron (219) pp. 508, 509: (Desm.) (= M. breviporus 
Auctt.) compared with M. maestrichtensis (p. 123), generally discussed 
(p. 126); Lambert (163): (Desm.) maintained against M. breviporus 
and Hebert’s interpretation; Lambert in Grossouvre (116) p. 966: 
of Hel >ert = Brissopsis danicus ; loc. cit. & (163) p. 128: of Koem. 
1870, does not agree with leskei Desm.; Lambert in Grossouvre 
( 116) p. 967: Rowe, 1892, agrees with Lambert’s conclusions; loc. 
cit.: that quoted by d’Orbigny from Ciply, is really M. maestrichtensis 
not M. ciplyensis ; Lambert (163) p. 123. M. ( Brissopneustes) mae¬ 
strichtensis n. sp., Maestriclitian of Limbourg; Lambert (163) p. 122, 
pi. vi. M. matheroni\ Grossouvre (116) p. 444. M. meunieri , v. sub 
Isomicraster : also Lambert in Grossouvre (116) p. 967. J/. michelini ; 
Grossouvre (116) p. 17. M. normanniae; Fortin (79): compared 
with M. maestrichtensis ; Lambert (163) p. 123: young quoted by 
Fallot must be M. leskei ; Peron (219) p. 509. M. praecursor Rowe; 
Hill (130): Sheppard & Stather (259): discussed as though it were 
supposed to be a species [although Rowe distinctly maintained that it 
was not a species—but then he gave it a specific name] and considered 
doubtful; Lambert in Grossouvre (116) p. 967. M. pseudoglyphus 
Grossouvre n. sp., syn. of M. schroderi ; op. cit. p. 968. J/. rostratus ; 
Fortin (82) p. 196. M. schroderi accepted ; Lambert in Grossouvre 
( 116) p. 968. M. senonensis, v. sub Isomicraster. M. sublacunosus 
(Geinitz sub Hemiaster ), not a Micraster at any rate, as Quenstedt 
thought; M. ultimus Mayer Eyrnar, probably a young Linthia ; 
M. ungula, a Hemiaster : Lambert in Grossouvre (116) p. 969. J/. 
valdivianus Philippi is Bchizaster ; Ortmann (212) p. 62. 
Micrasterinae , a tribe of Mesospatanginae, = Micraster Auctt. ; Lambert 
in Grossouvre (116) p. 969 : table showing characters of possible 
subgenera ; Lambert (163) p. 125. 
\Microcidaris , a genus of Leiocidarinae , Triassic ; Lambert (161) p. 27. 
t Micropsis,— M. crucis n. sp., Middle Eocene, Croce grande (S. Giovanni 
Ilarione), with fig., M. ( (Jrthechinus) superba (Dames sub Cyphosoma), 
discussed, M. ( Triplacidia) veronensis ; Oppenheim (210) p. 179. 
Moera atropos , feeding ; Grave (106). 
Neospatanginae n. subfam. of Brissidae , comprising Opissasterinae , Schiz- 
asterinae , Pericosminae , Brissopsinae ; Lambert in Grossouvre (116) 
p. 969. 
t Nudeolites, — N. cor avium Ag. (sub Nucleopygus ) distinguished fr. JY. 
minor and N. minimus by Lambert ; Grossouvre (116) p. 288. 
1902. [Vol. xxxix.] e 25 
