20 
suggests, identical with the same organs I (Agassiz) described 
from Colobocentrotus and to which I (Agassiz) gave the name 
of “Cystacanths”. 
Thougk Professor Agassiz has thus himself recognized his 
error in regarding these appendages as new and problematical 
organs, I think it desirable to have their history cleared up, the 
more so as the “Cystacanths” have already been accepted by Lam¬ 
bert & Thiéry in their “Essai de Nomenclature raisonnée des 
Échinides” (p. 42), the authors having not remarked that they are 
really only a kind of transformed pedicellariæ, made known long ago. 
A. Foettinger, in his paper “Sur la structure des pédicel- 
laires gemmiformes de Sphærechinus granularis et d’autres Échini¬ 
des” (Archives de Biologie II, 1881 p. 485, PI. XXVIII, Fig. 9) 
describes and figures a peculiar kind of pedicellaria from Diadema 
“munis de glandes et dépourvus de tete formée de valves articulées.” 
He calls them “Pédicellaires claviformes” and thinks them 
homologous with the globiferous pedicellariæ of Sphærechinus ; they 
differ from these latter only in the head being rudimentary, while 
the three large giands are evidently homologous to the stalk giands 
of the globiferous pedicellariæ of Sphærechinus. 
In 1887 Dr. O. Ha mann, in his “Beitråge zur Histologie 
der Echinodermen” Heft III, “Anatomie u. Histologie der Echiniden 
und Spatangiden”, verv carefully describes and figures a similar 
kind of organ from Centrostephanus longispinus and Sphærechinus 
granularis (p. 22—27, Taf. IV); lie considers them as a sort of 
pedicellariæ, as seems proved beyond doubt by the faet that in 
Centrostephanus they occur sometimes with a head, sometimes 
without. He calls them “Globiferæ” — a very unfortunate name, since 
a different kind of pedicellariæ already bears the name “globifer¬ 
ous”, as has already been pointed out by Duncan in his “Re¬ 
marks on Dr. Hamann’s Researches in the Morphology of the Echi- 
noidea”, (Ann. Nat. Hist. 5 ser. XVIII, 1886, p. 66—68), where a 
critical review of Ham ann’s researches on these organs is given. 
Ham ann’s view of their morphology is thus expressed: “In der 
