REPORT ON THE GASTEROPODA. 387 



10. Conus (Leptoconus) trigonus (?), Reeve. 



Conus trigonus, Reeve, Conch. Icon., vol. i. SuppL pi. iii. fig. 286. 



„ Sowerby, Thes. Conch., vol. iii. pts. 17, 18, p. 28, sp. 230, pi. ix. fig. 205. 

 Leptoconus trigonus, Adams, Genera, vol. i. p. 252. 



Contts trigonus, Weinkauff, Conch. Cab. (ed. Kiister), p. 336, sp. 300, pL Ixii. fig. 4. 

 „ „ Tryon, Manual, vol. vi. p. 42, pL xii. fig. 35. 



Station 190. September 12, 1874. Lat. 8° 56' S., long. 136° 5' E. Arafura Sea. 

 49 fathoms. Green mud. 



Habitat.— Philippines (Sowerby). 



I believe the Challenger specimen may be reckoned to this species, but I put it here with much 

 doubt. It is young and not in very good condition, being discoloured, though unworn. Compared 

 with the British Museum types it is flatter in the spire and much more sharply angulated than any 

 even of the young specimens — the whorls of the spire are much more closely and regularly spiralled ; 

 below the angle there are seven distinct stippled spiral furrows, which do not exist in those others ; 

 a Uttle lower on the whorl occur two more, while toward the point of the shell the spiral furrows 

 are both fewer and less equally arranged. 



11. Conus (Leptoconus) vittatus (?), Hwass. 



Conus vittatus, Hwass, Encycl. method., vers, vol. i. p. 704, sp. 95, pi. cccv. fig. 3. 

 Dillwyn, Cat., vol. i. p. 390, No. 67. 

 „ f Wood, Ind. Test., p. 80, pi. xv. fig. 63. 

 „ „ Lamarck, Anim. s. vert., vol. vii. p. 470, and (ed. Desh.) vol. xi. p. 49, sp. 63. 



,, „ Reeve, Conch. Icon., vol. i. pi. xiv. fig. 75. 



,, „ Kiener, Iconog., p. 110, sp. 91, pi. lxiii. fig. 5. 



„ „ Sowerby, Thes. Conch., vol. iii. pts. 17, 18, pi. cciii. (xvii. Gen.) fig. 410. 



Weinkauff, Conch. Cab. (ed. Kiister), p. 226, No. 177, pi. xxxvii. figs. 5, 6. 

 ,, „ Tryon, Manual, vol. vi. p. 43, pi. xiii. figs. 41-44. 



July 1874. Levuka, Fiji. 12 fathoms. 



Habitat. — Philippines (British Museum). 



The identification of this specimen is unsatisfactory, the shell being very young, and my notes 

 seem to indicate that there is some confusion either among the specimens or in the nomenclature 

 of the British Museum. Had there existed besides the difficulty of habitat resulting from the 

 locality to which the species is ordinarily attributed, I should have felt it necessary to abandon the 

 attempt to identify the Challenger shell altogether ; but the Philippines, from which various British 

 Museum specimens are derived, have a good many species in common with the Fiji Islands. 



