MUSEUM OF COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY. 217 



Subfamily PURPURIN.E. 



The species of Purpura inhabiting the region under consideration are P. pa- 

 tula Linne, P. deltoidea Lamarck, and P. hcemastoma L., varieties undata Lam., 

 floridana Conrad, and trinidadensis Gupp} r . They are all littoral species. 

 There are, of the Ricinula group, Sistrum nodulosum C. B. Adams, S. ferrugi- 

 neum Reeve, a beautiful variety of which has the spiral nodules small, elon- 

 gated, and scarlet, while the rest of the surface is of a dark vernicose brown. 

 The columella in this form is also of a fine red color, and it seems worthy of 

 separation as a variety rubidum. S. roseum Reeve appears to derive its color 

 from a crimson hydrozoon so common on West Indian shells. I should not 

 refer it, if H. Cuming's identification be correct, to Engina, as Tryon does, 

 though from the shell alone it is impossible to be certain. None of these 

 forms were collected by the Blake. 



Subfamily CORALLIOPHILINiE. 

 Genus CORALLIOPHILA H. & A. Adams. 



Coralliophila H. & A. Adams, Gen. Rec. Moll., I. p. 135, 1853. 



Pseudomurex Monterosato, Conch. Medit, p. 48, 1872 (name only) ; type, Murex 



laceratus Deshayes. 

 ? Latiaxis Svvainson, Man., p. 206, 1840. (L. Mawece Gray.) 



This genus should probably be called Latiaxis, as the type of Swainson is 

 with little doubt only a specimen abnormally loosely coiled. It was regarded 

 as abnormal by Gray, who described it. But I have not examined a specimen 

 of Latiaxis Mawece, and hence refrain from taking a step with regard to which 

 there is still some doubt, though fortified by the opinion of Sowerby, Deshayes, 

 Jeffreys, and Tryon. 



The name of Coralliophila was illustrated by a large number of examples by 

 the brothers Adams, but they selected no type. 



However, as the C. madreporarum of Sowerby was not included in this list, 

 and differs somewhat from the genuine typical species, it should not be taken 

 as an example of the genus, as has been done bj' some excellent authorities. 

 From this error probably has arisen the complication that the true Corallio- 

 phila has been renamed Pseudomurex, while a form which probably does not 

 differ from Rhizocheilus except in living upon corals with large stems instead 

 of gorgonians with small stems has been, in the latest manuals, cited as an 

 example of Coralliophora. A good many species which have no natural rela- 

 tion to Coralliophila have been included with it in the monographs. This has 

 added to the confusion. 



There can be no doubt whatever, in the mind of any one who has examined 

 a proper series of specimens with unprejudiced judgment, of the specific iden- 

 tity of certain typical Pseudomurices with certain typical Coralliophilas. The 



