Monograph of the Lamcllihranchiata. 211 



and the raspberry {B. occidentaUs) , as well as upon the apple, haw 

 (cratc^gus) , sweet-scented crab (Pi/rns coronaria), and added the remark, 

 it also probably fed on other rosacece, and now Prof, Frey has bred it 

 from the rose. Are we to have a distinct name for an insect every 

 time it is discovered feeding on a new plant ? I have not seen the 

 rose-feeding species, but we have seen no reason whatever for con- 

 sidering the sjDecies bred from the rose, as in any way specifically 

 distinct from those bred from the apple, haw, and pear. Lithocolletis 

 cratcRgella, Clem., affords a parallel case. Dr. Clemens observed that 

 it fed on the halv (cratcegus) and wild cherry (Frimtts serotind), and I 

 have recorded it from crakegus, Pyrus coronaia, quince (cydonia vul- 

 garis) and the flowering or Japan quince {Cydonia- japonica). I do 

 not know but that it would be better to check the species-makers, by 

 writing in advance, Tischria craicegella, T. pyriella, L. prunidla, L. 

 pyrieUa^ L. cydoniella, and L. japonicella, according to the plants 

 they are bred from respectively, and calling them phytophagie varieties. 

 No, that will not do, for they are not even varieties, otherwise than in 

 their food. 



Monograph of the Lamcllihranchiata of the Cincinnati Group. 



(By S. A. Miller.) 



This class is known by several names. The oldest name, "Bivalvla,' 

 of Linnaeus, under the rules adopted by the English naturalists thirty 

 years ago, takes precedence over all other names ; but on account of 

 its liability to mislead, as brachiopods are bivalves, it has not been 

 very generally adopted. Cuvier called the class Acephala, and La- 

 marck called it Conchifera, and their names are adopted by many 

 naturalists. Blainville, in 1814, described the class as LamellibrancJd- 

 ata, and from its seeming appropriateness it has come into very gen- 

 eral use in this countr^. 



I have borrowed the descriptions of the class and the orders from 

 British Palaeozoic Rocks, by McCoy ; but I have not attempted to 

 put the genera in the families to which they belong. McCoy and 

 Woodward have placed the genus Amhonychia in the family Aviculidce, 

 and I presume for the same reasons they would put Megamhonia and 

 Anomalodonta in that family. But these genera seem to me to have 

 a closer affinity w'ith MijaUna and other genera belonging to the Mgii- 

 lldce, than they have with the Aviculidce. One can not help being 

 struck with the resemblance between the hinge line of the Myalina 

 subqiiadrata and that of the Anomalodonta gigantea. It is quite prob- 



