430 



Frederick- Claipman : 



Remarks ox the Phylogenetic Relatioxships of the Australian 

 Species of Limopsis. 



L. canrellnta, Reeve, 1 from Queensland, has a surface-ornament 

 approachin2: that of L. heaumarieusis. but in outline the shell is 

 equilateral as in (Jli/rimeris, instead of subtrigonal. 



L. tenisoni, var. penelevis, Yerco,2 is evidently a descendant 

 of L. morningtonensis, Pritch., but with a larger and heavier 

 shell. 



The young shells of L. tenisoni are closely comparable with 

 the young (neanic stage) of L. maccoyi ; the distinctive 

 characters not predominating until the brephic stage. 



L. vljcornata, Yerco,^ is of the L. morningtonensis type of 

 surface ornament, but its shell is more equilateral and depressed. 



L. eucosmus, Verco,'' appears to have descended from L. in- 

 solita, with which it agrees in the contused ornament, with 

 pseudo-divergent striae. Tliis character, by the way, is not 

 ver}^ distinctly shown in the original figure. Its outline is sub- 

 orbicular, as distinct from the sub-trigonal to oblique shell of 

 L. insolita. We thus have in the past and present Australian 

 fauna the following types as distinguished by their surface 

 ornament: — 



Ornament. 

 Pectinate 



Fimbriate 



Malleate 



Cancellate 



Latestriate 



Fossil. 

 L. morningtonensis 



L. maccoyi 



L. insolita 



L. heaumariensis (also L. aurita, 



Brocchi, sp. of European tyjies) 



Recent. 

 L. teniso7ii, var. penelevis 

 L. vixornata. 

 Young of L. tenisoni. 

 L. eucosmos. 

 L. cancellata. 



L. tenisoni. 



In concluding these notes I would express my sincere thanks 

 to Mr. C. J. Gabriel for invaluable aid in regard to typical recent 

 specimens. 



1 Pect anculua eancellataK, Reeve, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1843, p. 188. 

 Icon., 1843, pi. vii., fig. 39. 



2 Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Aust., vol. xxxi., 1907, p. 218, pi. xxvii., fig. 5. 



3 Ibid., p. 219, pi. xxvii., fig. 1. 



4 Ibid., p. 219, pi. xxvii., fig. 2. 



Id., Conch. 



