■ A. E. Verrill — Mollxisca of the Nevi England Coast. 259 



form cannot be regarded as specifically distinct from the recent 

 shells. The latter show much greater differences among themselves 

 than those that distinguish the fossil from the ordinary form, known 

 as Y. horealis, while all the variations are connected together by 

 intermediate forms. 



I also consider V. JVovanglice Morse, a mere variation of this com- 

 mon and vai'iable species, hardly to be distinguished as a variety. 

 It differs mainly in its thinner texture, lighter hinge-plate; and more 

 transverse form — characters that are due partly to immaturity and 

 partly to unfavorable conditions of growth. 



Living shells, of the typical form of V. horealis., have been dredged 

 by the U. S. Fish Commission, off the eastern coast of Virginia, 

 where it is not uncommon, at moderate depths (57 to 150 fathoms). 



Loripes lens Yerriii. 



These Transactions, vol. v, p. 569, 1882. 

 Jeffreys, in Proc. Zool. Soc. London, for 1882, p. 685, identifies 

 our species with the Loripes lacteus of Europe. I am unable to 

 accept this identification. Although allied forms, they seem to me 

 as distinct as other species of this group, 



Leda acuta (Conrad). 

 Nucula acuta Conrad, Amer. Mar. Conch., pi. 6, fig. 3. 

 Leda M?ica Verrill, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., iii, p. 401, 1880; these Transactions, v, 



p. 572, pi. 58, fig. 41, 1882 (? non Gould). 

 Leda acuta Tryon, Amer. Mar. Conch., p. 182, pi. 38, fig. 496 (poor). 

 ? Leda commutata Phiiippi. 



Plate XXX, figure 15. 



Although this species was referred by me to Leda nnca Gould, 

 later investigations have rendered this identification doubtful. It is, 

 however, as indicated in my former papers, probably identical with 

 L. acuta Conrad, which was described much earlier. By Jeffreys it 

 has been referred to L. fragilis (Chemn., sp.), which he considers 

 identical with L. commutata Phiiippi. The identification of Chem- 

 nitz's figure is doubtful, and moreover he was not a binomial writer ; 

 it is therefore useless to attempt to restore his name. Not having 

 seen authentic specimens of L. commutata {L. fragilis Jeffreys) 

 from Europe, I am unable to express any decided opinion as to its 

 identity with our shell. In any case, acuta seems to be the oldest 

 available name for our shell. 



In this shell the posterior dorsal area, when seen from the dorsal 

 Teans. Conn. Acad., Yol. VI. 33 July, 1884. 



