THE NAUTILUS. 113 



V. 



VIVIPARA CAEINATA Bartsch. PL IX, fig. 5. 



Vivipara carinata Bartsch. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus., XXXII, 

 1907, p. 141, pi. XI, fig. 14. 



As already stated I do not think that the shell figured by 

 Bartsch as carinata Rve. is really that species. Bartsch' s speci- 

 men apparently belongs to a larger, more elongated species and, 

 if mature, lacks the black peritrerne that seems characteristic of 

 carinata Rve. The color is also different. 



The specimen that I have figured for comparison with what 

 I believe to be the genuine carinata Rve. and which seems to 

 agree very exactly with that figured by Bartsch, was sent by 

 Dr. Wesley Newcomb to the late Mrs. George Andrews with 

 another, which was correctly named as V. cumingii Rve. It is 

 No. 47035 Coll. Walker and measures: alt. 28.5, diam. 21.7; 

 aperture, alt. 16.2, width 13.1 mm. 



As " carinata " can not be used for either Reeve's or Bartsch' s 

 species and the two are evidently different, the better course 

 would seem to be to rename the form figured and described by 

 Bartsch and to leave Reeve's carinata to stand for further con- 

 sideration. I would propose that the species figured and de- 

 scribed by Bartsch be called V. bartschi, the type being No. 

 103666, U. S. Nat. Museum. 



VI. 



PALUDINA CUMINGII Reeve. PI. IX, fig. 7. 



Paludina cumingii Reeve. Con. Icon., Paludina, 1862, Sp. 

 11, pi. Ill, fig. 11. 



This species will also have to be renamed, as ' ' Paludina 

 cumingii" was used by d'Orbigny in 1835 for the South Amer- 

 ican species now known as Littoridina cumingii (d'Orb. ). Reeve 

 himself says that the name had been used by d'Orbigny, but 

 attempts to avoid the duplication by stating that d'Orbigny' s 

 species is a Paludestrina. This, of course, is impossible under 

 the international code. 



To make the change as inconspicuous as possible, I would 

 propose that the species hereafter be known as Viviparus cum- 

 ingianus. 



