NO. ] ACHATINELLA APEXFULVA DIXON WELCH I3 



fully collected material. The exact locality of 350 of these, mostly 

 extinct shells from the Gulick collection in the Bishop Museum, is 

 unknown. The remainder of the shells were collected by W. D. 

 Wilder, O. H. Emerson, J. S. Emerson, L. A. Thurston, C. M. Cooke, 

 Jr., R. A. Cooke, C. H. Cooke, D. D. Baldwin, E. D. Baldwin, 

 E. Lyman, A. F. Judd, and I. Spalding. 



Type specimens of all previously described forms were studied 

 whenever possible. Those in the British Museum were photographed 

 by E. J. Manley, those in the Academy of Natural Sciences of 

 Philadelphia by Miss Helen Winchester, those in the Museum of Com- 

 parative Zoology by the museum photographer, and those in the 

 Bishop Museum by Kenneth Emory. The remaining shells and the 

 holotypes of all new subspecies figured in this paper were photo- 

 graphed by E. Bafford, of Baltimore, and myself. 



The type of A. swiftii Newcomb and A. apexfulva Dixon were 

 among the few types not obtained for study. The type of ^. a. swiftii 

 should be in the British Museum but could not be located. Possibly 

 if search were made again it would be found labeled A. a. turgida. 

 The lot labeled A. a. szmftii is not the type lot. 



The data concerning localities are of four types. All localities that 

 were plotted from memory or prior to 1932 have an asterisk (*) after 

 the locality number. If the locality was collected after 1932, or if 

 an old locality prior to 1932 has been again collected and proved 

 correct, the locality number alone is given. A question mark (?) after 

 the locality number indicates that there is some doubt in my mind 

 as to the correct plotting of the material or that the material has been 

 localized from another collector's material. All localities known only 

 as to approximate regions and plotted years after collecting also 

 have one question mark. Two question marks (??) after a locality 

 or area indicate that the locality is believed to be somewhere in the 

 approximate region, but there is no data to substantiate the plotting. 

 The plotting of the locality may be based on the form and color 

 pattern of the shell and what is known of shell variation in adjacent 

 localities. 



As a general rule the greatest dimension of a locality collected 

 after 1932 is not over 100 or 200 yards, but some localities collected 

 prior to, and even some after, this date reach an extent of a quarter 

 of a mile or even as much as a mile. An attempt has been made to 

 plot on the locality maps (figs. 3-6) the exact location and extent of 

 each locality. Therefore the size of a locality and the distance be- 

 tween localities can be estimated from the scale of miles on each map. 



