Iredale. — Suter' $ "Manual of the New Zealand Mollusca." 431 



Patella antipodum (E. A. Smith, 1874). [P. 79.] 

 Suter has made use of this name for the species known in New Zealand 

 as Helcioniscus tramosericus Martyn. This name having been questioned 

 as doubtfully applicable to the Australian shell, and P. (liemenensis Philippi 

 used instead, upon Dall's advice Suter utilizes the present name as obviating 

 discussion, being certainly referable to the New Zealand form, whether this 

 be the same or different from the Australian species. It is regrettable that 

 such a pretty argument should be entirely spoilt by the fact that Smith's 

 name is not available. Almost the first shell I noted in the British Museum 

 was this species; and I was surprised — as most conchologists will be when 

 they read this note — to recognize in it a commonplace variation of Patella 

 radians Gmelin. In view of its usage by Suter I have consulted Mr. Smith, 

 the author of the species, and he agrees that his P. antipodum could be 

 easily classed as a variant of Gmelin's P. radians, while he emphasizes the 

 fact that it has no relationship with the Australian shell known as H. tramo- 

 sericus Martyn. Of this I collected a long series, showing variation and 

 growth stages, at Caloundra. Queensland. None of these exactly agree 

 with Martyn's figure. 



I have seen no Neozelanic specimens, so cannot say whether they differ 

 or not. I would certainly endorse Suter"s remark, " Species of the Patellidae 

 have usually a very limited range of distribution." Suter has not described 

 his Hauraki Gulf specimen, but reprinted E. A. Smith's account of his 

 P. antipodum, and, as this refers to a different species, there is no description 

 on record of Neozelanic " tramosericus." 



With regard to the Australian " tramosericus," if Martyn's name be 

 rejected the earliest recognizable name is Patella variegata Blainville (Diet. 

 Sci. Nat., vol. xxxviii, p. 101, 1825 : Botany Bay). This name is, how- 

 ever, preoccupied by Gnielin, so that choice then falls upon Patella jack- 

 soniensis Lesson. Zool. Voy. " Coquille," vol. ii, p. 418, 183 : Port Jackson, 

 New South Wales. Both these names were rejected by Pilsbry, but anv one 

 acquainted with Australian limpets can recognize them with ease. Blain- 

 ville described half a dozen other limpets at the place quoted, from Australia, 

 and it is just possible that one of these names may also apply; but I hope 

 to elaborate this in another place. This will suffice to show that it is even 

 probable that a name may exist for the Neozelanic "tramosericus," though 

 I think not. 



Cellana denticulata (Martyn, 1784). [P. 80.] 



In his distribution of this species Suter observes, " Hutton also mentions 

 Dunedin and the Chatham Islands." It is pretty certain that Hutton, 

 mainly dependent upon second-hand information, did not recognize our 

 names for the forms accepted. ' Thus in 1007 I made notes upon the Otago 

 Museum shells, and I observed that under the name P. deyitiodata specimens 

 were shown from Moeraki and Nelson ; but these were not that species, but 

 C. ornata Dillwyn. I do not know who was responsible for the incorrect 

 nomination, but the adjacent shells were true C. denticulata Martyn, and 

 these bore the data "H. strigilis var. redimiculum, North Island, F. W. H." 

 I should conclude this merely meant that Hutton collected or presented 

 these specimens, but he may also have specifically determined them. 



Cellana radians (Gmelin, 1791). [P. 81.] 



It may be as well to record that the date of Gmelin's Mollusca is given 

 throughout Suter's work as 1790, whereas it should be 1791 (Hopkinson, 

 P.Z.S., 1907, p. 1035), the earliest date of notice being the 14th May, 1791 



