KEPOKT ON THE GASTEKOPODA 193 



It was unfortunate that Philippi did not know the habitat of his species ; still more so, that 

 D'Orbigny failed to recognise that the species he got at Rio de Janeiro was Philippi's species, and 

 quite distinct from Lamarck's Fusus multicarinatus. That absence of information in the first 

 instance, and the mistake in the second case, has resulted in confusion, which has gone on increasing 

 till a whole multitude of species really quite distinct have been hopelessly mixed together. With 

 the kind and able help of Mr E. A. Smith of the British Museum, I have gone over the .whole of 

 the group as represented in the national collection. Of course it would be out of place to take up 

 that general subject now, the more so as Mr Smith will probably publish the results of our study ; 

 all that need be done here is to offer some notes on the species which have been mixed up with that 

 of Philippi. 



As to Fusus multicarinatus, 1 Lam. (Anim. s. vert., vol. vii. p. 125, sp. 9), under which 

 D'Orbigny classes his shells from Bahia, it would be very difficult to say what that species was. 

 It has been attributed by von Martens (Moll. Mauritius, &c, p. 244) and Dufo (Moll. Seychelles, p. 

 49) to the Indian Ocean, and by Menke (Spec. Moll. Nov. Holl., p. 25, No. 121) to Western 

 Australia. In any case it is a Red Sea species (Lamarck, loc. cit. supra ; Potiez and Mich., Moll. 

 Douai, p. 438, No. 12, but not pi. xxxiv. fig. 5 ; Kiener, Iconog., p. 17, sp. 12, pi. x. fig. 1, but not 

 pi. i. fig. 1, nor pi. xiv. fig. 2 ; Tapparone-Canefri, Muric. Mar rosso, p. 62 ; Issel, Malacologia Mar- 

 rosso, p. 138), and is not that from South America. In regard to Fusus verrucosus, Gmelin (Syst. 

 Nat., p. 3557, figured by Wood, Ind. Test., p. 126, pi. xxvi. fig. 77), to which Kobelt unites Fusus 

 marmoratus, Phil., it is the shell figured by Chemnitz (Conch. Cab., vol. iv. pp. 148, 189, pi. cxlvi. 

 figs. 1349, 1350), and ascribed by him to the Red Sea. It is also the species given by Savigny in 

 his Description de l'Egypte, hist, nat., Planches, vol. ii. 1817 ; Zoologie, Coquilles, pi. iv. fig. 18 

 (1 and 2). That figure is fairly good, but rather gives the impression of a stumpier shell ; the 

 upper whorls are too heavy, broad, and flat ; the suture is not deep enough, and the snout is too 

 short and thick. Fusus verrucosus comes very near Fusus marmoratus, but is quite certainly 

 different, and when once recognised can easily be distinguished. Compared to it, Fusus viarmoratus 

 is rather more brightly coloured ; the columella in both is twisted, but in Fusus marmoratus the 

 twist occurs much lower down ; both have the inner lip detached, but in Fusus verrucosus it projects 

 across the whole body whorl as a sharp-edged, prominent, slightly patulous, strongish lamina, behind 

 which is a deep narrow furrow ; whereas, in Fusus marmoratus, the inner lip is on the body thin 

 and closely appressed, and only in front towards the canal does it begin to detach itself as a 

 prominent lamina ; the mouth is shorter in proportion to breadth, and thus is more roundly oval ; at 

 the beginning of the canal the opening is narrower, the outer lip being pinched in here so as to be 

 roundedly indeed, but yet distinctly angular, and the edge has at this point a slight tendency to be 

 introverted ; the whole snout is shorter, stumpier, and altogether stronger, the outer lip is stained 

 brown on the edge, the teeth are small, sharply prominent, are connected with long sharp threads 

 which score the throat and have a distinct tendency to run in pairs ; while in Fusus verrucosus they 

 are larger but feeble tubercles. In Fusus marmoratus the spire is slightly stumpier, the whorls a 

 very little broader, and the suture hardly so deep as in Fusus verrucosus. Mr Angas (Proc. Zool. 

 Soc. Lond., 1865, p. 158) quotes Fusus marmoratus, Phil., as from Port Lincoln, " a single 

 specimen." There, has probably been an error of identification here. But for the confusion which 



1 A valuable note, on this species will be found in Philippi, Abb. und Beseh, vol. iii. p. 119, note to 

 the monograph on Fusus. 



(ZOOL. CHALL. EXP. PART XLII. 1885.) Tt 25 



