130 Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria. 



whilst dredgini; in the Straits of Malacca.* So that uiuler the 

 circumstances it would hardly be wise to retain the name 

 I^. iumida for our fossil, as the living shell under that name is a 

 very distinct species. Now, whatever may be the right name to 

 apply to our living Nucula, I have very grave doubts about its 

 identification Avith JV. grayi, D'Orb., being correct, and I have 

 up to the present been entirely unable to satisfy myself as to 

 what it should be. Our fossil form, in my opinion, must partici- 

 pate in the same name as the living form, and as vagueness and 

 uncertainty surrounds the latter, and as the former is obviously 

 in want of a name, the simplest way out of the difficulty for the 

 present, though perhaps not the wisest, is to propose for our 

 common fossil, figured and described in the above quoted works, 

 the new name of Nucula tenisoui, the specific name attached being 

 a tribute to the late Rev. J. E. T. Woods, whose researches in 

 Australian Tertiary Palaeontology are well known to all colonial 

 geologists. 



102. Led a crebrecostata, T. Woods. 



Z. crebrecostata, T. Woods, P.RS.Tas., 1876, p. 112. 

 Nuciilana crebrecostaia, R. Etheridge, jun., Cat. Aust. Foss., 

 1878, p. 155. 



Z. crebrecostata, Tate, Lam. I., 1S86, p. 133, pi. v., tigs, ba, 5b. 



103. Pectunculus cainozoicus, T. Woods. 



Ciuiilhea cainozoica, T. AVoods, P.R.S.Tas, 1876, p. 111. 



Pectunculus cainozoicus, Tate, Lam. I., 1886, p. 136, pi. x., 

 figs., 8rt, 8^. 



Id., R. M. Johnston, Geo. Tas., 1888, pi. xxxi., figs. 13, 

 13«, \U. 



104. Pectunculus laticostatus, Quoy and Gaimard. 



P. laticostatus, Quoy and Gaimard, Voy. de lAsti-oL, \(»1. iii., 

 p. 466, pi. Ixxvii., figs. 4-^6, 1835. 



P. laticostatus, McCoy, Prod. Pal. Vic, Dec. 11., 1875, p. 26, 

 pi. xix., figs. 10-14. 



*P.-?.S., 184.'}, p. 08, and Voy. H.M.S. "Sulphur," MoUusca, 1S44, p. C.'J, pi. xviii., %. 0. 



