SPURIOUS SPECIES OF MELAMPUS. 



15 



Orbigny's figure of Auricula ovula. It is a good representation 

 of our Florida shells. 



West Indian specimens are well known in cabinets. I know 

 of no American specimens, with the exception of the few collected 

 by Mr. Bartlett. 



Plate 19, fig. 6, of T. M. IV, may represent a variety of this 

 species. It is from Texas. 



Spurious Species of Melampus. 



Melampus horealis, Conrad, I have referred to Alexia myosotis. 



Melampus denticulatus, Stijipson, is also identical with Alexia myosotis. 



Melampus redjieldi, Pfr. (See T. M. IV, 170.) 



Melampus jmsillus, jloridanus, and cingulatus (see Tralia). 



Melampus ohliquus, Say. — Obconic, reddish brown, rather thick ; spire 

 very little elevated ; whirls eight or nine, wrinkled across ; labium 

 with two very distinct teeth, and an intermediate and equidistant, 

 slight obtuse prominence ; inferior tooth very oblique, terminating 

 at the base ; labrum with about eight teeth or strife, which termi- 

 nate on the margin ; base of the aperture a little contracted by the 

 basal tooth. Length more than seven-twentieths of an inch. 



I am indebted to Mr. Stephen Elliott for this species, who obtained 

 it on the coast of South Carolina. It is closely allied to BuUmus 

 monile, Brug., but it has no appearance of bands, which distinguish 

 that shell. In the collection of the Academy are specimens from 

 the West Indies. {Say.) 



Melampus ohliquus, Say, Journal Acad. Nat. So. Phila. II, 377 (Dec. 

 1822); BiNN. ed. 27.— W. G. Binney, T. M. IV, 167.— 

 Pfeiffer, Mon. Auric. Viv. 30. 

 Auricula obliqtia, DeKay, N. Y. Moll. 58 (1843). 



It is not now known what shell Say had in view when the above 

 description was written. No authentic specimen is preserved, and 

 no author has seen any shell from that locality answering to the 

 characters laid down. DeKay mentions it among the extra-limital 

 species in his report, his words being nearly a repetition of Say's. 

 Pfeiffer repeats Say's words, and suggests the identity of the species 

 with Melampus coffea. Say being familiar with that shell {M. 

 coniformis, vide ed. Binn. p. 85), it seems hardly probable he would 

 have described a variety of it. 



The question must remain undecided until we are better ac- 

 quainted with the species of the South Carolina coast. 



