420 Observations on some British S&piilce. 



Art. IV. Observations on so7ne British S^rpulcB, 

 ^y the Rev. M. J. Berkeley. 



In an interesting notice of Serpula tubularia Mont., by 

 Dr. Johnston, in p. 126., a doubt is expressed whether 

 S. tubularia Mont, and S. i;ermicularis of Authors have not 

 been confounded in an article in the Zoological Journal, iii. 

 229. The truth is, that, at the time the article in question 

 was prepared, my text-book for British conchology was Dr. 

 Turton's Conchological Dictionary, as being the most recently 

 published work upon the subject ; and, throughout, where 

 S. tubularia is mentioned, the species so named in that work 

 is intended, which is not the same with S. tubularia Mont,, 

 but is S. triquetra Mont. Test. Brit., pt. 2. p. 511. (Tubus 

 t;ermicularis Ellis, Corall. t. 38. f 2.), but not Mont. SuppL 

 p. 157.J which is the true S. triquetra. Though I was well 

 acquainted with the several allied species and their distinctive 

 characters, I confess freely that I was not then aware of the 

 identity of Montagu's S. tubularia, with S. arundo Turt,, and, 

 in consequence, supposing Turton's species to have been 

 first described by him, adopted his name. 



The following synonymes, which I find written on the back 

 of the rough copy of the article above mentioned, I shall beg 

 leave to subjoin, as they may possibly be useful to others in 

 the study of the common British species, whose nomenclature 

 has been most unfortunately confused, though, at the time 

 the Supplement to the Testacea Britannica was published, the 

 species were well known to Montagu. The only alteration I 

 shall make is the one suggested by Dr. Johnston, of the pro- 

 priety of which there can be no doubt ; viz., that the older 

 name of Montagu should be preferred to the more recent 

 one of Turton. I am quite satisfied, on a careful examination 

 of Turton's descriptions, that he had in view the species 

 figured in Ellis, quoted above, for his S. tubularia, and the 

 S. tubularia Mo?it. for his S. arundo. If not, the very com- 

 mon species of Ellis is altogether omitted ; or, if S. t;ermicu- 

 laris of the Conchological Dictionary be supposed identical 

 with it, the almost equally common species with a double 

 infundibuliform operculum, figured by Miiller, ZooL Dan., 

 t. 86. f. 7 — 9. I shall only add to these observations, that 

 S. tubularia Mont, ought certainly to be placed in a different 

 genus from S. t;ermicularis, &c., being altogether destitute 

 of an operculum. According to the principles of Cuvier's 

 Regne Animal, it belongs to the genus Sabella, and is one of 

 the rare instances in which a shelly tube occurs in that genus. 



