ETHALIA. 459 



2, f. 11. (Not Tr. callosus Gmel., nor Tr. callosus Wood, nor Rotella 

 callosa Sowerby.) 



May be known, when typical, by the mottled coloration, with 

 narrow spiral articulated lines above, the crimson callus almost 

 closing the umbilicus, the globose-depressed form, etc. It seems to 

 have real affinity with Chrysostoma nicobaricum and also with Umbon- 

 ium. Specimens in which the umbilical callus is not fully developed 

 are very similar to Monilea. This species is the type of Ethalia A. 

 Ad., and Liotrochus Fischer. 



Var. MONTROUziERi Souverbie. PL 59, fig. 37 (enlarged). 



Very minutely spirally striate above, whitish or ashen, marbled 

 and lineated with greenish, reddish or flesh-colored ; umbilical 

 callus frequently completely closing the perforation, white. 



E. ZELANDicA Hombrou et Jacquinot. PI. 58, figs. 9, 32, 33 ; pi. 



59, fig. 66. 



Shell depressed, imperforate, solid, yellowish or pinkish, radiately 

 streaked with chestnut brown or red above, base with a reddish or 

 purple zone around the central callus, the outer part white, more 

 or less striped radiately ; surface smooth, shining, base showing 

 under a lens very fine, close, regular spiral strire ; spire low, conoidal, 

 sutures linear, not impressed ; last whorl concave above, the com- 

 pressed periphery encircled by two rather obscure carinte ; base 

 slightly convex, with a narrow spiral groove bounding a central area 

 which is covered by a thin, radiately rugose, purple and white 

 callus ; aperture rounded quadrate, nacreous and iridescent within ; 

 columella short, very thick and heavy, its edge pearly, inserted in a 

 pad of white callus on the body and over the axis. 



Alt. 11, diam. 19 mill 



Auckland to Dunedin, New Zealand. 



Rotella zelandica Honibr. & Jacq., Voy. au Pole Sud, Moll., p. 53, 

 t. 14, f 5, 6, 1854. — Umboniuinzelandicum A. Adams, F.Z. S. 1853, 

 p. 189. — Rotella zelandica Ad., Sowerby, Conch. Icon, xx, f. 11 ; 

 Thes. Conch, v, 136, f 24. — Globulus angulifervs Philippi, Conchyl- 

 ien Cab., p. 51, t. 8, f. 3 (1853?). — Rotella neozelanica Hutton, 

 Proc. Linn. Soc. IST. S. Wales ix, p. 357. 1884.— Ui»6o?«:»Hi chal- 

 conotum A. Ad., P. Z. S. 1853, p. 188. 



Although this shell is imperforate, I do not hesitate to place it in 

 the same genus with the Rotella guamensis. It does not belong in 

 Rotella {JJnibonlnm) proper. The callus emitted by the columelhar 



