40 _ COCKERELL AND COLLINGE : CHECK-LIST OF SLUGS. 



p. II. L. tenelhis. (ienus uncertain ; the name cannot 

 be certainly applied to Limax teneUns, Auctt. It 

 is greenish white, mantle yellowish, head and 

 tentacles black. 

 391 a-c. Moquin-Tandon's A. flavus, with three varieties belongs to 

 intertnedius. 

 392. Priority demands the use of the earlier name paladilhiamis^ 

 Simroth remarks on the close affinity of this with iiiier- 

 medius, and there seems nothing to separate it other than 

 as a subspecies. 

 398-399. It is doubtful whether these two forms should take even 

 sub-specific rank. In all probability, circumscripius, placed 

 as a synonym o( fasciatiis, is the .same as ainlu'i^uus ; and 

 the forms named subfnscus ( = the British representative of 

 neustriac2is) flavescois and j^risa/s belong rather to amhigiius 

 than to fasciitus proper, judging by the character of the 

 keel, which in these is lost in the adult. For further 

 observations see Mr. Colhnge in Cofichoicis^isf, 1892, vol. ii., 

 pp. 77-80, where an alternative and possibly better arrange- 

 ment of the varieties is given. ^^ 

 402-403. Mr. Pollonera kindly sent me A. mortilkti from Rosazza, 

 Piemont, and A. spezice from Maccugnaga, Piemont. I (Hd 

 not dissect them, but judging from their appearance, they 

 might w^ell be the same species. Mr. Pollonera states (in 

 litt.) that A. spezice is smaller than iiiortilleti, and its 

 mantle is also proportionately smaller. 

 Letourneiixia. Opinions differ about this. Heynemann in 

 1882 said it was scarcely distinct from Ariou ; Pollonera 

 gives it as a sub-genus of Geonialaciis ; and now Simroth 

 places it as a valid genus. 

 410. According to Simroth, morehii may not be distinct from 



7iumidica. 

 413. Geomalacus pliocenicus, Sacco,from Piemont (Upper Pliocene), 

 should from its locality belong to the Letoiirncuxia group, 

 which may formerly have inhabited Italy, and have been 

 driven south during the glacial epoch. From the fossil it 

 would be impossible to decide this one way or the other, 

 and the generic reference merely rests on the balance of 

 probability. 



'' Having seen all the varieties excepting d. of this species 397, I do not agree with the 

 arrangement adopted in the present list. Miser, Poll., is as distinct from grisetis, Cllge., as 

 neustriiic'is, Mab., or airl/>iinctatiis, Ckll., are; Jial'escens, Cllge., is a variety in which the 

 yellow predominates, ■nenstriaciis is quite a dfferent thing. The two are possibly brought closer 

 together by suh^uscus, Roeb. I say possibly, for I never could distinguish wherein this latter 

 differed from neustriacus. — W. E. C 



