Notes on Some Points in the Structure and Habits of the Palaezoic Crinoidea

fourth, fifth

and

sixthin orbit, lastthree longerthan high; temporals 1

—

^2.

Ten

inferiorlabials,postgenialslongerthanpregenials.

Total length 23-5 in,; to vent17 in.; to rictus oris7 lin.; to orbit1-5 lin.

Gastrosteges 197, urosteges 105.

Yellowish-brown

above, gastro-

and

urosteges rich yellow.

Top

of

head

brown,lipspaler,theupper edgesof the plateslight,continuinginto a streak to belly.

From

theSeychelleIslands; found by U.S. consulPike. Mus. Acad. Nat.

Sciences.

Notes on

some

points in theStructureand Habitsofthe Palaezoic

CKINOIDEA.

BY

F. B.

MEEK AND

A. II.

WORTHEN,

Ofthe StateGeologicalSurveyofIllinois.

Through

thekindnessof Mr.CharlesWachsinuth, of Burlington,Iowa,

we

haverecently

had

an opportunityto examine

some

unique

and

exceedinglyin- terestingspecimensof Carboniferous Crinoids,

showing

parts of the structure of theseanimals,in

some

instances, never before observed, sofaras

we

^{are at}

thistime informed. In a fewinstances,thesespecimens

show

internal organs entirelyfreefrom the matrix,

and

althougli like all theother solid parts of these curious creatures,

composed

of

numerous

calcareous pieces,really sur- passingindelicacy of structure thefinestlace-work,

and

so^frailthat a touch, orevena breath,might almost destroythem.*

Some

of thesespecimens

we

propose tonotice here, but, before proceeding todo so,

we

^avail ourselves of thisopportunitytoexpressour thanks to Mr.

Wachsmuth

forthezeal,indus- try, skill

and

intelligencehe hasbroughtto bear, in collecting

and

preparing forstudy,suchan unrivaled series of the beautiful fossil Crinoidea of this wonderfullj'-richlocality.

Some

idea of the extent of his collectionofthese preciousrelics

may

be formed,

when we

statethatof the single family Actino- crinidie alone,after

making

due allowance for probable synonj'ms,he

must

have specimensofnear 150species,orperhaps more,

and many

of

them show-

ing the body, arms

and

column. _,

It isalsoduetoMr.

Wachsmnth,

that

we

should statehere thathe isnota

mere

collector only, butthathe understands

what

hecollects,

and knows

just

what

to collect,as well as

how

to collect.

Below we

give substantially

some

notes of observations

made

inhis collec- tion, followed

by some

remarks onother specimensatSpringfield^:

1. Sf/nbathocrinus, Phillips.

Some

of Mr.

Wachsmuth's

specimensof aspe- ciesof thisgenus

show

thatitisprovided witha long, slender,pipe-stemlike ventral tube, or proboscis,apparentlyequalingthe

arms

inlength. Also,that adouble

row

ofminutealteruatingmarginalpiecesextendsup withinthe

am-

bulacralfurrowsof the arms, apparentlyall their length.

We

arenot aware that thesecharactershave been hitherto noticed in

any

ofthe publications

on

thisgenus. Itwill beseen,however,farther on,thatminute marginalpieces probably occupiedthe furrows alongthe innerside of thearmsof other types of Crinoidea, as well asthis.

2. jfoniasteroidocrinus,

Lyon and

Casseday.

Some

unusually finespecimens of the typical species ofthis genus [G. tuberosum)iu Mr.

Wachsmuth's

collec- tion,from Crawfordsville,Ind.,

show

the slender pendent

arms much more

distinctlythan

any we had

before seen,

and

from these itseemsevident that thesearmsarestouterthan

we had

supposed,

and

that there are not

more

than fiveorsixof

them

toeachofthe ten openings. Inthe specimenfiguredby us on page 220of thesecond

volume

of the IllinoisReports, these

arms

were only imperfectly seen by

working

away, withgreat difficulty, thehard matrix be-

*ByMr.Wachsmuth'spermission,wehave preparedfor future publication,dravrmgsof

allof these instructivespecimens.

1868.]

OF

tweeu

two

of theproduced rays of the vault,

which we

have termed pseudo- bracliial appendages, or false arms. In clearing

away

the matrix ofthis specimen,

we

hadcut justfar

enough

to exposetheedges of the

arms

on each sideof thedeep ambulacralfurrow, so that eachof these edges presents the appearanceofbeinga separate

and

distinct,veryslenderarm,

composed

ofa single series of pieces,

and

without any ambulacral furrowonthe outer or ventralside; whereas thereisawell-defined ambulacral furrow,bearing the tentaculaalongitsmargins, ontheoutersideof thearms,

and when

thematrix

is

removed

fromtheseambulacralfurrows, thearms canbe seentobe

composed

eachofadoubleseriesofsmall alternately-arrangedpieces. It isbarely possi- ble thatinspecimensof thisspecieswith the arrasperfectly preserved,thatthe ambulacral furrows

may

becovered onthe outer or ventral sidebya double seriesof alternating pieces,

and

that the tentacula*

may

connect with little

openings along each side,

though

there certainly appeartobe onlyopen fur- rowsinthespecimens examined.

It is

worthy

of note, in this connection, that there certainly are species, agreeing exactlyinallother

known

characterswith this genus, that have

no

open furrow along the outer or ventral side of thearms,whichare distinctly seen toberound on the outerside,

and show

thereadoubleseriesofinterlock- ing piecesalongtheir entire length, while the tentacula connect along the inner, orunderside,asthe

arms

are seen

hanging

down. Thisisclearlyseen tobe the caseina beautiful specimenof

G

typus{=Trematocrinustypus,Hall) inMr.

Wachsmuth's

collection,

and we

^can scarcelydoubtthatinthisspecies thereisan open furrow onthe inner (under) or dorsal side of the arms. If not,the arms

must

be tubular,inconsequenceofhavingthe ambulacralcanal aclosedall around, exceptingatthe points

where

thetentaculaconnect along each side.

3. Cyaihocrinus,Miller. Specimensof this genus

showing

the vault

(more

properly the ventral disc)have veryrarelybeen seen. In

England

afewex- amples have beenfound,

and

thesehave been supposedto

show two

openings, onecentral

and

another lateral; the latter, according to Prof. Philipps'

and

Mr. Austin'sfigures, being provided witha slendermarginaltube,orso-called proboscis.

Some

ofMr.

Wachsmuth's

specimens,however,ofC.malvaceus

and

C. loiuensis, Hall,

showing

the vault,have led us todoubtthe existence of a centralopeninginthevault of thisgenus,

when

thespecimens havethis part entire.

The

specimen ofC.malvaceus

shows

theremainsof the usual

narrow

lateralproboscis,

and

alsohas an openinginthemiddle ofthevault,but from theappearance ofthisopening, as well asfromthestructure of the vault of a specimenofC. lowensis, in

which

thisopeningisclosed,

we

canscarcelydoubt thatit

was

also closed in thespecimen ofC. 7nalvaceus,

when

entire.

The

re-

maining

parts of thevault of the C. ynalvaceusmentioned consist of onlyfive comparativelylargepieces, alternatingwith theupper inneredgesof thefirst radial pieces,

—

theone onthe analsidebeinglargerthanthe others,

and

form- ing the base of the innersideof the proboscis. Thesefivepiecesconnect wilh each otherlaterally,

and

extend inward

some

distance,bat not soforas to

meet

at the centre,

where

there isa subsemicircular opening, nearly as large asthatin the remaining base of the proboscis.

Along

each of the sutures betweenthefivevault piecesmentioned,a comparativelylargefurrow extends inward from each arm-base to the centralopening. These

we

regardascon- tinuations of theambulacral furrows fromthe arms, thoughthereisalso ami- nuteopeningateach

arm

base,passing directly

downward

intothe cavityof thebody,

which was

probablyforthepassageof thearm-muscles.

Looking

at this specimen alone,one

would

naturally suppose there

must

*

We

usethetermtentaculaherein the sense itisgenerallyusedbypaljeontologists, with referencetothe delicate pinnulre alongthe arms of Crinoids,andofcourse notas applyingtotheminuteflestiyorgans alongtheambulacralfurrows, usuallytermedtenta- clesby thosewhohaveinvestigatedtherecentCrinoids.

[Dec.

have

been,duringthelifeoftheanimal, two^distinctopeningsinthe vault, as appears tobethe case in the specimen ofG.planus, Miller,figured

by

Prof.

Phillips

and

Mr.Austin. But on examining the specimenofC.lowensis

men-

tionedabove,

we

findthatit

shows

thebase of the smalllateralproboscis,with thefiveprincipalvault-pieces alternatingwith the first radials (the one

on

theanalsidebeinglarger thanthe others),

and

the

same

ambulacral furrows extendinginwards fromthearm-bases,allexactly asintheC.malvaceus.

But

here

we

findthe central opening undoubtedlyclosed hjseveral vault pieces, while the ambulacral furrows, extending inward from the arm-bases, pass inunderthese central pieces,

and

are themselves occupied, or covered,

by

a doubleseries of alternating, veryminute pieces,

which

probablyalso extend on,allthe

way

uptheambulacral furrowsofthe

arms

asmarginalpieces.

From

our examinationsofthese

two

specimens,

which

are theonlyexamples of thegenus

we

have seen,

showing

the vault pieces,

and

seem tobe typical forms of thegenusinallother respects,

we

are strongly inclinedto think the specimen of G.planus, figured byProf. Phillips

and

Mr. Austin, hashadthese central vault pieces

removed

by

some

accident.

The

factthat these piecesin thespecimen

examined

bj'us,in Mr.

Wachsmuth's

collection,

seem

notto be deeply implanted between the five larger surrounding pieces mentioned, but ratherrest,asitwere, partly

upon

the

narrow

bevelled points of the innerends ofthe latter, between the ambulacral furrows, so ast(3allow

room

forthese furrows topassunder,

would

render

them

less firm,

and more

liable to be re-

moved by any

accident,

and may

possibly account fortheir absence in the English specimen mentioned.

In regardto thepieces covering the central part of thevault,

and

which,

from

the

way

theyare arrangedfortheambulacral furrowstopassunder them, were apparently

more

liable tobe

removed

thanthe others,

we would remark

thattheydo notpresent theprominent appearance,

and

uniformityofsize

and

form, of the

movable

pieces

composing what

isoftencalled the ovarianpyra-

mid

inthe Cystids,butcertainlyhaveall the appearances of truefixedvault pieces, andscarcely projectabovetheothers surrounding them. Consequently

we

cannotbelieveitatallprobablethat thisgenus

had

a centralmouth, open- ing directlythroughthe vault; though its ambulacral canals evidentlycon- verged fromthearm-bases to themiddle of the vault, partlyabove the outer vaultpieces,

and

underthose

composing

themiddle of the vault.

That

these furrows terminatedatthe entranceof thealimentarycanal,underthe middle ofthevault,as those ofComatulaconvergetothe mouth,in the

same

central position, is highlyprobable; and, aswill be seen further on,

we

are

much

in- clinedtobelievethat theminute organisms

upon which we

areled,from ana- logy, tothink theseanimals subsisted, were conveyed tothe entrance of the alimentarycanalalong the ambulacral furrows, without the agency of

any

proper mouth, opening directlythrough the vault.

Hence we

thinkitproba- ble thatthesmall tube, usually called theproboscis, situated near the poste- riorside of the ventral disc, rather corresponds to the tubular anal opening similarly situatedin ComatulaiMediterranea.

From

ourdescription of the vault of these species,itwillbeseento present considerable similarityto thatof Crotalocrinus rugosus,exceptingthat in that genus,

owing

toitsgreat

number

of arms,the ambulacral furrows, or canals, bifurcate several timesbetween the middle of the vault

and

the arm-bases, whilein Crotalocrinus thereisno lateral proboscis, nor,apparently,even

any

visibleopening,judgingbythe figures

we

have seen,though

we

suspectit

may

havea smallopeningatthe peripheryof the veutrnl disc,onthe posterior or analside. InthegroupofdepressedPlatycrinifor

which

Troostproposedthe

name

Cupellsecrinus

we

observea

somewhat

similarvault,atleastin

some

of the species; alsoin Coccocnnus. Insuch formsthere

would seem

to be, asitwere,

an

intermediategradationbetween the

modern

Crinoids

and

the prevailing PalcEozoic types, ashasbeen pointed out

by

Mr.Billings.

4. Convoluted support ofthe digestivesack, in theActinocrinidx.

The

presence

1868,]

PROCEEDINGS OF

of a largeconvoluted body, resemblinginform theshell of a Bulla orScaphan- der,withinthe

body

of several types of theActinocrinidee,

was

noticedbyProf.

Hallin vol.xli, p.261 of the

Am.

Journ.Sci.,in1866,though he

made

nosug- gestions thereinregardto the functionsitprobably performedinthe internal

economy

of theseanimals. In the second

volume

ofthe IllinoisGeological Reports,publishedsoonafter,

we

figured,on page 191, aspecimen ofStroto- criiius,with this

body

seeninplace,

and

statedthat

we

regardeditashaving been connected with the digestiveapparatusofthe animal.

Both inProf. Hall's

and

our

own

remarks,this organ

was

spoken of as a convolutedplate. This, however,

we now know

is not strictlycorrect, for al-

though composed

of hard calcareous matter, andin

some

species

somewhat

dense instructure,itseems tobealways constructedof a great

number

ofmi- nutepieces,

and

generallyhasa

more

orlessopenorporoustexture; whileiu

some

casesitpresents the appearance ofan exceedinglydelicatenet-work. It

seems neverto beattachedto thebottom ofthe visceral cavity,though it ex- tends

down

nearlyto thebottom. It is openatboth ends (theopeniugatthe lower end beinggenerally smallerthanthe other),

and

isplaced withitslonger axisnearly so astocoincidewith that of the

body

of the Crinoid. In

some

speciesitis

more

or less dilatedat theupperend, while in others itis con- tractedat bothends, so asto present, asabove stated,the formof theshellof a Bulla. Ithasapparetitlynocolumella,butis

more

orlessloosely convoluted, with a spiral ridgedescending the interior,

and

sometimes another ascend- ing theexterior. Itswalls are generally ofmoderatethickness,butthey often appeartobe thickerthannatural, in consequenceof thepresenceof inorganic incrustations, of calcareous or silicious matter,

which

also disguise its real structure.

In Actinocrinus Verneuilianus,

Shnmard,

this

body

is

narrow

below,

and

sub- cylindricalabovetothe top,

which

is slightlydilated.

The

smallopening at thelowerend has athickenedrim,

which

passes around spirally, so asto as- cendthe outside, as a rather stoutridge,all the

way

tothetop,

making

nearly

two

turns,

and

apparentlyalsoformingarimpartlyaroundthetop.

The

sur- face of the

whole

organ, as well as ofits external spiral ridge,hasthe usual rough appearance,

and when

fragments ofitare held up, so astobe

examined by

transmittedlight,through a

good

pocket-glass,itisseento be

composed

of a great

number

of veryminute polygonal pieces,varying

somewhat

in form andsize.

When

these pieces are

examined

under a magnifier,by^reflected lighl,they

show

shining facets, like crystals,though they are evidently not surface incrustations,butactually

compose

the walls, orsubstanceoftheorgan

itself.

No

pores or

meshes

were observed passing through the walls of this organin thisspecies, in

which

itappearstobe

more

than usually dense.

luanotherspecimen inMr.

Wachsmuth's

collection,apparentlyof Aclwocri- nusproboscidialis, thisorgan, as seenwith oneor

more

of the outer turns re-

moved,

hasanoval or subelliptic form,being contracted

and

twisted at both ends, so astopresentvery nearly the api)earance of the^shell of

some

species of Ovuluvi. Itswalls are quitethin,

and seem

toform

more

convolutions than in

any

other speciesin

which we

have

had

an opportunityto

examine

^it.

As

seen bythe aid of a magnifier bytransmitted light, itpresents averybeauti- fulappearance, being

composed

ofa great

number

of minutepieces, with nu-

merous

openings passing through

between

them.

The

little pieces

and

the openingsbetween them, are of nearlyuniform size,and arrangedso that there are usuallyoneor

two

oftheformerinterveningbetween any

two

of theopen- ings.

Another

ofSir.

Wachsmuth's

specimensofActinocrinu.ssecvrus,\{si\\, hasone side of the

body removed

so asto

show

about

two

thirdsof theconvolutedor- gan, theupperpart of

which

is broken away.

The

partremaining hasashort- wide subcylindrical form, witharatherbroad, obliquelytruncatedlower end,

which

is not tapering, asinthe otherspecies.

Under

a magnifieritisseen to be

composed

of anextremelj-finenet-work, farsurpassing, indeed,indelicacy

[Dec.

of Structure, thefinestlaces thatitisperhaps withinthe

power

ofhunaanskill to fabricate; andasitisentirelyfreefrom any surroundingmatrix,excepting atoneside below,thespecimen hastobehandled with great care,as a

mere

touch of thisdelicatepart

would

probably causeit to fall into hundreds of minutefragments.

On

examiningitundera magnifier, thelittlebars of

which

it is

composed

are seen notto intersect each other at any uniform angle,but anastomose,so astoimpartakindof irregular regularity,if

we may

so speak, to theform

and

sizeof themeshes.

Of

theselittlebars there aretwosizes,the largerformingthe larger meshes, while within thelattera smaller^setof pro- cessesextend partly or entirely across, so as toform

more

minute

meshes

; the

whole

presenting a beautifulappearance,ofwhichit

would

bedifficulttocon- veya correct ideabya

mere

description alone,withoutthe aid of figures.

From

analogy,judgingfrom

what

is

known

of the internalstructure ofthe recent genus Comatala,in which several authors have noticed a reticulated calcareousstructuresecretedwithinthe tissue of thesofterparts ofitsalimen- tary canal,

we may

inferthatthis convoluted organwas, asitwere, akind of frame work,secretedforthesupportof the digestive sack,

which was

probably

more

orlessconvolutedinthe

same way

in

many,

ifnotall of thePalaeozoic Crinoids, though not apparently, in all cases,

endowed

with the

power

ofse- creting asuflicient densestructure ofthiskindtoleave traces ofitsexistence in afossil state.

So

faras

we

areat this time informed,thisorgan hasyet been veryrarely observedin

any

other family thantheActinecrinidse,

though

it

was

probably

more

orlessdeveloped invarious other groups. In one instance Mr.

Wach- smuth

founditina Platycrinus,buthereitseemsto be, inthespecimenfound, merelya spongy mass, not

showing

very clearly the convoluted structure.

Some

tracesof

what was

supposed to be something of this kind werealso observedby

him

inoneof the Blastoids.

5. Ambulacralcanahpassing underthevaultintheActinocrinidx. In the third

and

fourth Decadesof descriptions

and

illustrationsof the Canadian Organic Remains,Mr.Billings, theable palajontologist of the GeologicalSurveyof the Canadianprovinces, gives

some

highlyinteresting

and

instructiveremarks on theambulacral

and

otheropenings of the Palaeozoic Crinoids. In these re-

marks

he noticed, at length,

some

striking differences betweenthe vault,or ventraldisc,oftheseolder types,

and

that of thefewlivingexamplesof this extensive order of animals. That^is,he noticed the facts, that while inthe living Comatula

and

Pentacrinus, the ambulacral canals are seen extending from thearm-basesacross the surface of thesoft skin-likeventral disc, tothe centralmouth,

and

these generaare provided with a separate anal opening, situated excentiicallybetween the

mouth and

the posterior side,thatin the palaeozoicCrinoids the ventral disc is verygenerally, ifnot always, covered

by

close-fitting,solidj)lates,

showing

noexternal traceswhatever of

ambula-

cral furrowsextending inward from the arm-bases;

and

that in nearly all cases they aremerely provided withasingle excentric, orsubcentralopening, oftenproduced into a long tube which, like the vault,is

made

upofsolid plates.

He showed

that there is no evidence whatever that theambulacral canals, inthese older types,were continued alongthe surface of the vaultfrom thearm-bases to theonlyopening,

whether

subcentrally orlaterally'situated,

and

that in cases

where

this opening is produced in the form of a greatly elongatedproboscis, or tube,suchan arrangementof the

ambulacra would

be almost a physical impossibility.

Hence

he concluded that the ambulacral canals

must

have passeddirectlj'through the walls of the

body

at the arm- bases;

and

he gave several figures of varioustypes,

showing

ojjeningsat the base of the arms,through

which

he maintainedthat theambulacra

must

have passedto theinteriorof the

body

fromthe arms.

Although

these arm-openings

had

long beenwell

known

toallfamiliarwith our

numerous

types ofwestern CarboniferousCrinoids,in

which

they are very

1868.]

conspicuous,

and we had

never entertained

any

otheropinion in regard to them, thanthatthey are the onlypassagesof

communication

thatcould have existedbetween thesofterpartsoccupyingthe ambulacral furrowsof thearms,

and

the interior ofthe body, Mr. Billings

was

the firstauthor, sofar as

we

are atthis timeaware,

who

called especial attention to

them

in this regard.

We

regretthat

we

have not spaceto quotea portion, atleast, of his remarks

on

thissubject,

and would

advise the studentto read attentivelythe

whole

of both ofhis articlesalludedto.

The

specimensatMr.Billing's

command

enabled

him

totracethe courses of theambulacral canals from the arms,through the walls of the bodyat the arm-bases,

and

toascertain the additional fact that,afterpassingthroughthe walls, they

seemed

to have turned

upward

; but

beyond

this he

had

not the

means

of tracing

them

farther.

A

^singlespecimen of Aclinocrinusproboscidialis,however,inMr.W^a.chsmuth'3 collection,isina condition (thanksto the great skillof that gentleman,

and

theexceedinglyfortunate state of preservation,by which itsdelicate internal parts remain almost entire,

and

without

any

surrounding matrix) to throw

much

additional lightonthis subject.

By

very dextrous manipulation, Mr.

Wachsmuth

succeededin

removing

abouthalf of itsvault,so astoexposethe internalparts, inplace,

and

inan excellentstateof preservation.

The

convo- lutedorganalready describedin other speciesis in this comparativelylarge, subcylindrical inthe middle,apparentlytapering at thelowerend,

and

a little dilatedattheupperextremity. Itseemsto be rather dense,

and shows

the usual rough appearance, but as

we had

no opportunity to

examine any

de- tached fragmentsofitby transmittedlight,

we

didnot determine

whether

or not ithasporespassingthroughit,thoughitprobably has,atleast

when

en- tirely free from anyinorganic incrustation. Its slightly dilated upper end seemstostand withits middle almost,but apparently not exactly,under the middleof the nearly central proboscis of the vault; whileat the anteriorside ofitsupper margin,

and

a littleout from under the proboscis,it

shows

re- mainsofakindofthickenedcollar,

which we

foundtobe

composed

ofminute calcareouspieces.

From

thisthereradiate five ambulacra,

composed

of the

same

kind ofminutepieces asthe collaritself,each

ambulacrum

consisting of

two

rows of these minute pieces alternately arranged.

They

are each also providedwitha distinctfurrow alongtheir entirelength above.

As

theyra- diate

and

descend fromtheirconnection with the top of theconvoluted frame-

work

ofthe digestive sack,theyallbifurcate, so as to senda branchto each arm-opening, thosepassingtotheposterior rayscurving alittleatfirstabove, so as not to pass directlyunder the proboscis. These ambulacra, although passing alongobscure furrowsintheundersideof the vault,

which

aredeepest nearthe arm-openings,are not incontactwith the vault,or visiblyconnected with

any

other partsthan the topofthe convoluted digestive sack,

and

the outerwalls at the arm-openings.

Each

oftheirsubdivisions can be traced intoan arm-opening,

and

it is veryprobable that they continued

on

out the ambulacral furrowsof the

arms and

tentacula.

At

one pointin one of these ambulacral canals,beneaththe vault,

some

evidencesof the remainsof

two

rowsofminutepieces were observedalternatingwiththe upper edgesofthose

composing

theundersideof these canals,

and

thusapparentlycovering

them

over.

The

condition of the parts is such, however, as scarcely to war- rant the assertion thatthis

was

really the case,

though we

are

much

inclined tothink itwas. Ifso,thesecanals

must

havebeen, atleastunderthe vault, hollow tubes,formed of

two

rowsof pieces below,

and two

above, all alter- natelyarranged.

We

arenot

aware

that any evidences of the existence ofthese delicate ambulacralcanals,

composed

ofminutecalcareouspieces,

and

passing beneath the vaultfromthearm-openingstothe

summit

of theconvoluteddigestivesack, haveever beforebeenoljservedin

any

Crinoid, recent or extinct;

and we

can but thinkitprobable, that the extremelyrare combination ofcircumstances

[Dec.

thatbrought

them

to light in thisinstance

may

not again occurforcenturies to come, with regardtoanotherspecimen. That they correspond to the

am-

bulacra! canals seenextendingfromthearm-basetothemouth, onthe outside of the ventraldisc in Comatida,isclearly evident.

The

presenceoffurrowsradiatingfromthe central region of theunderside of the vaultto thearm-openings, invarious types of palaeozoic Crinoids,

must

have beenfrequentlyobservedbyall

who

have

had

an opportunitytoexamine theinner surface ofthis part. Messrs.

deKoninck and Lehon

figurea portion of the vault of

Actmocnnus

slellaris,intheirvulnahleRecherches surlesCrinoides duTerr. Curb,de la Belgiqiie,pi. iii,fig. 4f.,

showing

thesefurrows,

which

they

seem

tohave regardedastheimpressions left bythe muscles of the viscera.

The

inner surface of the vault of

most

ofour western Carboniferous Cri- noids is

known

to have these furrows

more

or less defined, either from specimens

showing

thisinner surface, orfromnaturalcastsof the same. In

some

instancestheyarevery strongly definedfromthe central region

outward

tothearm-bases,toeachof

which

theysendabranch. In Actinocrinus orna- tus,Hall, forinstance,theyare generally so strongly defined asto raise the thin vault intostrong radiatingridges,separatedby deep furrows on the outer side. InStrotocrinus,the vault of

which

is greatly expanded laterally,

and

oftenflat on top,these internal furrows,in radiating outward, soon

become

separated bypartitions,and as they go on bifurcating,to send abranchto each arm,they actually

assume

the character of

rounded

tubularcanals,

some

distance before theyreachthearm-bases.

Thatthesefurrows orpassages of theinner sideof thevaultwere actually occupied duringthelife of theanimalbythe ambulacral canals as they radi- atefromthetop of theconvoluteddigestivesacktothearm-openings,

we

think uo onewill fora

moment

question,after examining Mr.

Wachsmuth's

speci-

men

of Actinocrinusproboscidialix,

which we

havedescribed,

showing

all these partsinplace. It isalso

worthy

of note, thatinall the specimens of various typesin

which

thesefurrowsof the under side of the vault arewell

known,

whether from detachedvaults,or fromcasts of theinteriorof the same, they never convergedirectlytotheopeningofthevault,but toapointonthe anterior side of^it,whetherthere isasimpleopeningoraproducedproboscis.

The

pointto

which

they converge,even in typeswith a decidedly lateral openingof the vault,isalwayscentral orverynearlyso,

and

even

when

theopeningisnearly or quitecentral,the furrows

seem

to go,as itwere, outof their

way

to avoid

it,those

coming

fromthe posterior rays passingaround on each sideof itto the point ofconvergenceofthe others, alittleinadvanceof theopening. That theambulacralcanals here,underthispoint of convergenceof thefurrowsin theunder side of the vault,always

came

together

and

connected with the upperendoftheconvoluted

frame-work

of the digestive sack,

we

canscarcely entertain a doubt.

Now

inlookingatoneof thesespecimens, especiallyan internal cast of the vault,

showing

the furrows (or casts of them) starting from a central, or nearly central point,

and

radiating

and

bifurcating so as tosend abranch to eacharm-base, whiletheopeningor proboscis of the vault (or the protuber- ancerepresentingitinthe cast)is seento occupya position

somewhere

ona linebetween thiscentral pointfrom

which

thefurrows radiateandtheposte- rior side,one canscarcelyavoid beingstruckwith the fact,that thispoint of convergenceof the ambulacra,under the vault,bears the

same

relationsin positionto theopeningof the vault, that the mouth of aComatidadoesto its analopening.

And when we remember

that eminent authorities,

who

have dissected specimens of the existing genus Comatula, maintain that these animalssubsistedon microscopic organisms^floatingin the sea-water,suchas the Diatomacece,minuteEntomostraca,etc.,*

which

were conveyedtothe

mouth

*Bronnmentionsthefact(Klassen des Thierreichs. Aetinozoa,II, p. 211),that the re- mainsof Diatomacese, of thegeneraNavicula,ActinocydusCoscinodiscus,andofminute Kntom- ostracawere found in thestomachofComatula,and suggeststhat,whensuch objects, in

1868.] 22

alongtheambulacralcanals,perhapsby

means

ofcilia,

we

are ledfrom analogy tothink that thepalffiozoicCrinoids subsisted

upon

similar food,conveyed ⁱⁿ the

same way

lothe entranceof the digestive sack If so,

where would

there have been

any

absolutenecessityfora

mouth

orotheropeningdirectly through thevault,when, as

we know,

theambulacralcanals were sohighly developed underitfromthe

arm

openingstothe entrance into the top of the alimentary canal? Indeed it seemsat least probable, that ifthe soft ventral ^disc of Comatulahad possessed the

power

of secretingsolidvault pieces, as inmost types ofpaheozoicCrinoids, that these vault pieces

would

not onlyhave covered overthe ambulacralfurrows, asin the paliBOZoic types,but that they

would

alsohave hermetically covered overthemouth, and convertedthe littleflexi- ble analtubeintoa solid calcareouspipe,suchasthat

we

often call the pro- boscisin the extinct Crinoids.

From

^all the facts therefore

now known

onthis point,

we

are ledto

make

the inquiry

whether

ornot, in allthe palaeozoic Crinoids in

which

there is

buta singleopening in the vault

—

whether it is a simple aperture or pro- longed intoa proboscis,and placedposterially,subcentrally, orat

some

point onalinebetween themiddle

and

the posterior side

—

^{this opening}

was

^not,

iastead ofbeingthemouth,or both

mouth and

anus as supposed by some, reallythe anal aperture alone;

and whether

inthese types the

mouth was

not geuerally,ifnot alwa3-s, hermetically closed by

immovable

vault pieces,so faras regardsanydirect opening through the vault?

We

areawareof thefact,thatatleastone apparentlystrong objection

may

be urged againstthis suggestion,andinfavor of theconclusionthat the single openingseeninthese olderCrinoids

was

themouth, or at leastperformedthe thedoubleoffice of bothanal

and

oral aperture. That^is,the frequentoccur- rence of specimensofthese palasozoicspecies,withtheshelloia,Platycerasin close contactbyitsaperture, eitherwiththeside or the vault of the Crinoid,

and

not unfrequentlyactuallycovering theonlyopening inthe vault of the latter,so astohaveledto the opinion that theCrinoid

was

in the very act of devouringthe

MoUusk

atthe

moment when

itperished.

Amongst

the

numerous

beautifulspecimens ofCrinoidsfoundinthe

Keokuk

division of the

Lower

CarboniferousseriesatCravvfordsville, Indiana, thereis

onespecies of Platycrinus (P. hemisphsericus), thatisso

abundant

that proba- h\jnotlessthan

two

hundred,andpossiblymore, individual specimensof it

have been foundtherebythedifferentcollectors

who

havevisited thatnoted locality; and,judging fromthose

we

have seen,apparentlyabout one-halfof these were found with a moderate sized, nearly straight,or very slightly arched

and

conical Platyceras [P. infundibuluni), attached to oneside by ^its aperture,between thearmsofthecrinoid,and often so as tocover the single lateral opening in the vault of the

same* From

the direction of the slight curve of theapexofthe Platyceras,itisalso evidentthatitisalways placedin suchamanner, withrelationtothe Crinoid,thatthe anterior side of theMol-

floating ^In the sea-water,camein contactwith theambulacra! furrowsofthe pinnulte, they were conveyed along^thesefurrowstothose of thearms,and thenceinthesame way into themouth.

He

ridicules theidea,sometimessuggested, thatthe food

may

have been handedbythe pinnuliBorarmsdirectlytothemouth.

Dujardin andHup6alsostate(Hist Nat.des Zoophytes Echind.,p.18),that the living Comatulawas ^"nourishedby microscopicyl///;?and floating corpuscles,which the vibra- tile ciliaof theambulacra broughttothemouth." That they

may

have sometimes swal- loweda largerobject,that accidentallyfloatedintothemouth, however,isnotimprobable, andwouldnot,ifsuchwasthe case,byanymeansdisprove the generallyaccepted opinion thattheseanimalsreceived their foodalmostentirelythroughtheagencyof theirambu-

lacralcanals.

*

We

atone time thoughtthese shells attachedtothe side of this Platycrinustobe out ofreachof the opening, orsupposed mouth, becausewehadnotseenspecimensshowing the position of theopeningin thisspecies,and had supposed, fromitssimilaritytoPlaty- erinusgranulatu!!, Miller,andother specieswithout alateralopening,that such wasalso the case withthis.

We

havesinceseenspecimens, however, showingthatithasalateral opening,andthereforebelongstothegroupPkurocrinus, so thatitisprobablethese shells oftencoverthis opening.

[Dec.

liisk

was

directed upward,

wbeu

the vault of the Crinoid

was

turnedinthat direction.*

A

^species of Goniasleroidocrinus [O.tuberosus,

Lyon

and Casse- day),found atthe

same

locality,also has frequently a Plali/cerasattached to the top of itsnearlyflatvault, so as to cover the onlyopening in thesame.

It iswortiiy ofnote,however,that it is always another, subspiral, Flatyceras (very similarto P.nequilaterum),that

we

find attachedto this Crinoid, so that hereat least,it

would seem

thateach ofthesetwoCrinoidshasits

own

par- ticular species of Plafyceras.

Inallofthese,and

numerous

otherexamplesthat

might

be mentioned, itis

worthy

of note thatit isto speciesof CrinoidsAvith a simple openingin the vault,andnottoanyofthosewith aproduced proboscis,that

we

find these shellsattachedin this

way

^;-j-

and

itisso rarely that

we

findshellsofanyother genus thanPlati/ceras,appareuth^ attachedto,orin contact with, the

body

of aCrinoid, thatitseems probable wliereothershellsareoccasionallysofound, thattheirconnection withtheCrinoid

may

lie merelyaccidental. If itcoulil beestablished as a fact, that these Crinoids were actually devouring these Mollusks, by suckingout,orotherwiseextractingand swallowingtheir softer parts, inanyinstance

where

theyhave been found withashell attached over theopeningof the vault,this would,of course, establish the fact that this openingisthemouth,or,atleast,thatit

must

have performed the office of bothoral

and

anal aperture. Buttosaynothinginregardtoallthatis

known

of the habits andfood of the recent Crinoids beingsodirectlyopposedtosuch aconclusion, thefactthat so large a proportionas nearlyone-half of all the individuals of

some

speciesshould havediedat the precise

moment

of time

when

theywere devouring a Plafyceras,

and

should have been

embedded

in thesediment

and

subsequentlyfossilizedwithout separating from theshell, seems,tosay theleast ofit,veryimprobable.

And

itiseven

more

difficulttounderstand

upon what

principalan animal with

itsviscera incasedina hard unyieldingshell,

composed

of thick, close-fitting calcareouspieces,

and

withevenitsdigestivesack, as

we

liavereasonto believe, atleast to

some

extent, similarly constructed,could haveexerted suchpowers of suction asto be ableto

draw

out and swallow, through an aperturein its

own

shell, oftenless than one-tenthofan inch indiameter, thesofterparts of a mollusknearlj-or quiteequalin

volume

tothe whole of its

own

visceral cavity. That they ever didso, however,

becomes

still

more

improbable,

when we

bearin

mind

the fact,that the animal supposed to

have

performed this feat, lived, at leastduringthe

whole

ofitsadultlife,attachedtoonespot bya flexible stem, that onlyallowed it a radius of a foot or soof area to seek itspreyin; while themollusk ^it is suppose1 to have so frequently de- voured, fromitscloseaffinitiesto thegenus CapuLus,

may

be supposedto have almostcertainly livedmostof^{its life}attachedtoonespot.J Insuchacase,

why

* Prof. Ricliard

Owen

hasnoticed,inhisReportonthe Geological Surveyof Indiana,p.

364(18(52),the frequentoeeurreneeofaPlattjcrasattachedtothissamePlatycrinus,atthis locality,andpropo.sedto

name

the PUdyccrns P. pabiilncriniis,fromthesupposition thatit

formedthechief food of these Crinoids. Itisprobable that the Pliti/ceras forwhioh he proposedthisname,isthesame we namedP.in/umUbiUum, butashe gave nodescription of the species,andbutan imperfect figure, we oanuotspei\kp'lsilinlt/asto its identity.

Prof.Hallhasalsoproposedthe

name

of^{/^.}subrectumforthisCrawfordsville/"<rti/':'ra.i,liut

he hadpreviouslyusedthesame

name

foraverydifferent,

Kew

York,Devonianspecies ofthisgenus.

Prof.YandellandDr.Shumai'd havealso figuredintheirpaperentitled"Contributionsto the GeologyofKentucky,"aspecimenof Acrucrinus,with avery simdarPlatycerasappar- ently attachedtoitsvault.

Amongst allthe numerousCrinoidsfoundatBurlington, Iowa,we areawareofbut a singleinstaneeofone being foundwithaPta^ycerajjattached,andthat^isaspecimennfActi- nocrinusvenlricosus inMr.Wachsmuth'scollection,whichhasacrushedshellofaI'lalyci-ras connected withitsvault.

t Possiblyduetothefact^that inspecieswithaproboscis thereis

much

lessroomfor attachmenttothevault.

iMo.stof the bestEuropeanauthoritiesonpalaeontology referthese shellseventothe existmg genusCajjidus,

1868.]

PROCEEDINGS OF OF

shouldtheCrinoid haveso frequentlyleft the Platyceras to

grow

within ita reachto nearlyitsadultsizebeforedevouringit?

But

iffrom

some unknown

cause itshouldhave doneso,

by what means

could the Crinoid have pulled loose theMollusk (which from analogy

we may

reasonably supposeheldwith

some

degeee of tenacityto its place ofattachment),

and

placed it with the aperture of itsshelloverthe opening supposedtobeits

own mouth

? Thatit

could have used itsarms

and

tentacula as prehensile organs,in this sense,is

extremely improbable fromtheirverystructure, so

much

so indeed that few

if any of the best authorities

who

have investigated the recent Criuoids, believe thattheyever usedthese appendages to

hand

directlyto themouth, evenminute

organisms*

But

we

believe the strongest

argument

against the conclusion that the Criuoids, so frequently found with the shell of a Platyceras attachedto them,diedwhile inthe act of suckingout,orotherwise extracting the softer parts of these Mollusk,remainsto bestated. In thefirstplace, ifsuchreally

was

thenatureofthe relationsbetween the Crinoid

and

the Mollusk,it is of course self-evident that the continuation of the^lifeof thelatter

must

have necessarilybeen ofveryshortduration afterit

came

incontactwiththe Cri- noid. Yet

we

havethemostconclusiveevidencethatsuch

was

not the case;

butthat on the contrary, inmostifnotall of these instances, the Platyceras musthavelivedlongenoughin contact with the Crinoidtohave adaptedthe sinuosi- ties ofthe margins_ofits shellexactlyto the irregularities of ^{the surface} ofthe Crinoid.

We

have taken

some

troubleto

examine

carefully a

number

of specimens ofPlati/crinus heinisphcericus,

and

Goniasteroidocrinustuherosus,from Crawfords-

ville,Indiana, with eacha Platyceras attached,

and

in all cases

where

the specimensarenot too

much

crushed or distorted, or the hard argillaceous shaly mattertoo firmlyadherenttopreventthe line of contact betweenthe shell

and

Crinoid tobeclearly seen, the sinuosities of the lip of theformer closelyconform tothe irregularnodosesurface of thelatter.

Owing

tothe fact thatin

some

cases the shell has evidently been forced

by

accidental pressure against the surface of the Crinoid, so as to

become somewhat

crushed, this adaptationisnot alwaysso clearly evident; butin

most

cases it is

more

orless visible,whilein

some

it is strikingly manifest. In one instance of a Platycrinus

now

beforeus,with a Platycerasattached, as usual, to itsside,betweenthe arm-b3sesof

two

of itsadjacentrays,

and

of rather largersizethan those usuallyfound attachedto this species,the adaptation of the irregularities of its lip,so as to receive the little nodes

and

other

prominence

of the Crinoid,isso clearlymanifestthat a

moment's

examination

must

satisfy

any

onethat the shell

must

have

grown

^there. Being, as

we

stated, a larger individualthan

we

usually see so situated,itnot onlyoccupies thewholeof the interradialor anal space to

which

it is attached, but its lateral

margins

on each side

coming

in contact with the arm-basesof the Crinoid, as the shellincreased in size,

had

formed on either side a profound sinusinitslipforthe reception ofthesearms. Thesesinuses arenot onlyinpre-

*la

many

instancesit isclearlyevidentthatitwould have been anabsoluteimpnsnhility forcertain types ofour CarboniferousCrinoidstohavehandedanyobjectgreat or small,di- rectlytotheonlyopening throughthevault.Thatis,wherethisopeningisattheextremity of a straight rigid tube, often nearly twice the length of the arms,even to the extreme endsof their ultimate divisions.

We

areawarethatsomehave supposedthistube,or pro- boscis,to nave beenflexible,andtheMessrs. Austin even thought itwasespeciallyde- signed and usedforthepurposeofsuckingout the softer parts of Polyps. If flexible,we might supposethat inthose eases where itwasso

much

longer than thearms,thatit

could have been curvedso astobringitsextremitywithinreachof theendsof thearms;

but although we haveinafewinstancesseenthistubemoreorlessbent, a carefulexami- nationalwaysshowedthat,wherethiswasnotduetoanaccidental fractureaftertheileath of theanimal, it was caused bythe plates composingit beingon oneside larger, or dilTerentlvlormed fromthoseonthe other,andevidentlynotto flexibility.

We

findthe arms, which wereevidentlyflexible,foldedand bentineveryconceivablemanner, butthe tubeof the vaultis,innineeases out often,ifnotmorefrequently,whennotaceideuially distorted,foundtobeperf«ctlystraight,or alittleinclinedtooneside or the other.

[Dec.

cisely theproperplaces, butof exactly the proper^size

and

form to receivethe adjacent

arm

on each side; the entire adjustment being so exact,that it

seems

scarcely possible that the shell could have been

removed

duringthe lifeofboth animals,

and

aftertheMollusk

had

attainedits presentsize,with- outeitherbreakingits liporbreakingoffthe

arms

of the Crinoid. Unfortu- nately, in clearing

away

the rather hard argillaceous matrix, before the

arrangement

of the parts

was

clearly

comprehended,

these arraswere broken away, buttheir stumpsare stillseen protruding from the sinuses,

which

are sodeep as almostto present theappearance of isolated perforations,though

it isevident, ona carefulexamination,thattheyareonly deep emarginations extending up fromtheedgeof thelip.

Inlookingatthe sides of this Platyceras,

which

hasthe form of a very slightly arched cone,*

and

standsout nearlyatrightanglesto the side of the Crinoid, itiseasyto see,from abrupt curves ⁱⁿthelines ofgrowth, alongup

itssides,on a line above the sinuses mentioned,that these sinuses

com- menced

forming abruptly at points about half

way

up;

and

on

measuring

acrossbetween these pointswith a pairof dividers, the space between is

found tocoincide very closely withthat betweenthe inner sides of the

arm-

bases protruding fromthe sinuses.

Hence

it is evident that the shell

bad commenced

forming these sinuses in its lip exactly at the period of its

growth,

when

ithadattained abreadth thatbroughtthe edges of itslip in contactwith thearm-bases. After this,it

had

increased verylittle inbreadih

between

the

arms

of the Crinoid,

though

it

had grown somewhat

wider above

&nd

he\ow,a.ndnearl;/doubledlislenffth.

Whether

or notit covers the open- inginthe side of the vault of the Crinoid

we

are unable to say,since the folded

arms

(whichare,asusualinthese cases, well preserved)

and

adhering matrix,coverthevault.

We

have scarcely

any

doubt

now,

however,that the Platyceras does,in this, asin

most

of the other cases, actuallycovertheopen- ing inthe side of the vault of the Crinoid.

From

the factsstateditis,

we

think, evident that these

MoUusks

actually- livedlong

enough

aftertheirconnection withthe Crinoids,to

which we

find

them

attached, notonlyto have adaptedtheedgesof theirlipto fitthe sur- face of the Crinoid, buttohavegenerally increased

more

or less in size,

and

in

some

instances,at least, tohave actually nearly or quite doubled their size. Admittingthis to be the case

— and we thinkthere can be no reas- onable doubt on this point— we can no longer believe that these Crinoids were preyinguponthe MoUusks; and we therefore think nowellgrounded argumentscan be based upon the fact of their beingso frequently found attachedinthemannerdescribed,in favor of theconclusion thattheopening in thevault of these Crinoidsisthemouth.

But,ifthey werenotinthe habit of eating these

MoUusks,

it

may

be asked

what

could have beenthenatureof the relations

between

the two, that so frequentlybrought

them

together as

we now

find

them

?

The

firstexplana- tionthat suggestsitselfis,that possibly theMollusk

may

have been preying

upon

the Crinoid. Butthefacf,alreadystated,that these

MoUusks

evidently livedlong

enough

attached tothese Crinoids, as

we

have every reasonto be- lieve,during thelifeof thelatter,to haveatleastincreased thesize of their shellsconsiderably,if notindeed duringtheir entiregrowth,is alone anal-

most

insurmountable objectionto such a conclusion. Doubtless, like othfr marine sedentary animals,these Mollnsks,

when

very young, floated freely about in the sea, until they found a suitable stationto attach themselves,

where

they

remained

duringlife.

May

^{theynot,therefore,have beenattracted}

to thebodies ofCrinoids by the

numerous

littleorganisms broughtin bythe action of cilia,alongtheambulacral furrows^{of the}

arms

of the Crinoids, or in currentsproduced

by

themotions of the

arms

of the latter?

The

excre-

*Itbeingthe

common

species of Platyceras thatis usuallyfound attached tothisPlaty- crinus.

1868.]

334 PROCEEDINGS

iiiatiousmatterof the Crinoidcould doubtlesshave passed outunderthe foot of the rialycerax,supposingthe openingin theCrinoidsometimes covered

by

theseshells to

haAe

been the anus,but it is difficult to conceive

how

food could have passedin, if

we

supposethis openingtobe themouth.

On

the Seed Vessels of

FOESYTHIA.

BY THOMAS MEEHAN.

Forsytlda sm^penaa Vahl.,

and

F. viridissima Lindl.,

two

Chineseplants,have

Ibelieve,neverbeen

known

toproduceperfect seed,

though common

in cul- tivation.

The

latter rarely produces capsules; the former bears capsules freely,but no perfect seed.

These

two

plantshavestrong specific differences;yet

my

studiesin devel- opment,aspublished inpapers in our Proceedings,lead

me

tobelieve

them

to have an unity of origin. Noticinglast spring that thestamensin F.siis- j>ensa, andthepistilinF.viridissima,

were

relatively

more

highly developed,

Isupposed the

two might

possiblybe,as

we

say practically,male

and

female formsof the

same

thing. ^Iimpregnatedflowers of F.viridissimawithpollenfrom F. siispensa,

and

for the first time

had

theopportunity of examiningperfect capsules ofthis species.

The

seeds, however, though apparently mature, proved imperfect on dissection. There is no doubt but thacF. suspeitsa con- ferredonthe other the

power

to producecapsules,

— whynot the additional powerof perfect seeds isamystery,—though not more soperhaps than that

itshouldItselfbeableto produce onlyseedless capsules.

Another

form is ])robably missing, necessary to fertilizethe plant

and

furnish the

wanting

linktoprovethe hypothesisof a unity oforigin.

But

some

useful facts proceed from the experiment.

The

capsule of F.

viridissimaIbelieve has never been described. Lindley, the author of the species,doesnot

seem

tohave seen it. It is broadly ovate,sharp pointed, ai,d wrinkled, carpels of a thin papery texture, bivalvate. Seeds resem- blingsmall grains of white wheat,wingless,developing

upwards

a swell as

down

fromthe funiculus, shining,

and

profusely pittedwithsmalldots.

The

pedunclesare rather shorterthanthe pods. One capsule ivasfour-celled,^ciih seeds in each division.

F. siispensais variously described

by

different authors.

Bunge

says the capsule is '-about four-seeded," Endlicher " few,"

and

Zuccarini

"numer-

ous."

The

author

makes

the seeds "narrowly winged." ^I findthe capsule narrowlylanceolate, ligneous,

and

verrucose, on pedicels double its length,

composed

of

two

carpels, inoneof

which

Icountedsixteen

immature winged

seeds; one,however,

was

full}"developed,althoughas inthe other form im- perfect,

and

thiswaswingless, exactly resemblingthose ofF. viridissima in all butcolor,

which was

alittledarker.

The

chief interestis the relationthese capsules exhibitto Syringa

and

to the allied orders of Solanacere

and

Jasminaceap. It

was

plaininthe four- celled ^taj)suleofF. viridissimathat plaeentous matter pushes out from the central axis in four directions,

though

usually the two alternates are destitute of^ovules.

When

^{barren it is}

most

highly developed.

On

perfect seeds it

forms no

margin

; on imperfect ones a wing, until in Syringa,

where

the productivedivision bears only a single

winged

seed, theunproductive one is

expanded

^{into a}long broad wing, pushing through the

whole

length of the incurved carpellary margins, cementing

them

closely together,

and

thus necessitating the peculiar dorsal dehiscence familiar inthe

common

Lilac.

A

^slight difference in the vigor ofplaeentous development constitutes the chief causeof the differences inthese threeformsof capsule.

The

polyspermousplacentation ofForsythiaindicatesanapproachto Sola- nacea>,

and

the erect tendencyof the seeds toJasmiuaceffi.

[Dec.