CYPR^A.— Plate X. 



LINNJ5US, Syst. Nat. (12tli edit.), p. 1177. 



Cypreea adusta, Lamarck. 

 Hub. San Diego, California. 



This species presents thi-ee remarkably distinct varieties 

 all of which, represented in the accompanying plate, are 

 well known to collectors. 



Species 40. (Mus. Saul.) 



Cype/EA Soweebyi. C>/pr. tedd oblongo-ovetd, depressi- 

 tisadd, subumbilicata, dorso ceerulescente, obscurissime 

 qnadrifascialo, maculis htaquaUbus castatieo-fitsck cre- 

 betrime et confuse picto, e.rtremitatibiis bad lateribuspie 

 aurantio-fusds, laieribus et extremitatibus nigro-punc- 

 tatis dentibns albidis. 



Soweuby's Coweey. Shell oblong-ovate, rather depressed, 

 slightly umbUicated, back blueish, very obscui'ely fom'- 

 banded, very closely and confusedly painted with 

 unequal chesnut-brown spots, extremities, base, and 

 sides orange-tinged brown, sides an^xtremities dotted 

 with black, teeth whitish. 



KiENEB, Icon. coq. viv. p. 38. pi. 7. f. 3. 



Cypraa zonata, Gray, (not of Chemnitz). 



Eadem, Cypraa femiginom, Kiener. 



Hub. Mouth of the Gambia, Africa. 



The Cypreea Sowerbyi has been confounded with another 

 very distinct species, Cypraa coiia/a (for which see Plate 

 XIII. Fig. 58.), and great confusion has resulted from the 

 different interpretation put upon a very obscm'e figiu-e pub- 

 lished under that name by Chemnitz (Conch. Cab. vol. x. 

 pi. 115. f. 1343), and copied in an absm'dly embellished 

 style into Wood's ' Index Testaceologicus '. 



After a cai-efol examination of figm-es, and the compa- 

 rison of an extensive series of specimens I am inclined to 

 think that the shell above described, and of which the ac- 

 companying figure is a rich characteristic example, was 

 coiTcctly introduced for the first time by Mr. Gray in the 

 Zoological Journal, vol. iv. pi. 7. f. 8, as a new shell, but 

 the name intended to distinguish it, maculaia, was not em- 

 ployed, because the author subsequently determined to 

 refer it to the Cypreea zoiinta of Chemnitz ; and, curious 

 enough, the word maculata was at about the same period 

 (September 1824) used by Jlr. Barnes in the ' Ann. Lye. 

 Nat. Hist. New York,' in reference to a shell, which, though 



only figured in outline, is clearly a C. reticulata. We have, 

 however, another extremely variable species of a shorter 

 and more pyriform shape (vide Cypraa zonata, pi. 13. 

 f. 58.), of wliich the figure above alluded to in Chemnitz is, 

 in my opinion, either an uncoated, or immature specimen. 



The following history may assist in the determination 

 of these species, and, I ivish I might say, put an end to 

 the confusion attending them. 



In the year 1788, before the different phases of colour 

 which the Cowries exhibit at different periods of growth 

 were fuUy imderstood, Chemnitz (Conch. Cab. vol. x. 

 pi. 145. f. 1342.), published the figm-e of an African spe- 

 cies in an incomplete state, showing the zones of lunar spots 

 ("zonis macidis lunaribus") characteristic of an interme- 

 diate stage of growth. Lamarck in 1832 confii-med the 

 propriety of regai-ding this shell as new, by the discovery 

 of an adidt specimen of the same, not otherwise described 

 (" mais parmi ceUes du Museum se trouve un invidu com- 

 plet") ; but his testimony not being accompanied by any 

 figm'e it is difficidt to say Avith which of the two species 

 (Sp. 40, or Sp. 48, of the present monograph), he had in 

 his own mind identified it. Mr. Gray in 1824 published 

 a figm-e of the former of these (and I think correctly), 

 as a new species, ivith a name which he abandoned in the 

 text, referring it to Chemnitz's Cypraa zonata ; and sub- 

 sequently to that, as if desii'ous of retm-ning to the opuiion 

 which I now hoj)e to maintain, inserted a note to the fol- 

 lowing effect; "The reference to Chemnitz is doubtfid," 

 (Zool. Jom-n. vol. iv. p. 81.), Mi-. Sowerby follows Air. 

 Gray in refemng this species to the C. zonata without 

 allusion to the doubt expressed in the note above alluded 

 to ; and no figure appeared of the true Cypraa zonata (such 

 at least as I hold to be the tme one), until M. Kiener 

 figiu'cd both species under the same name (Icon. Coq. viv. 

 pi. 7. f. 3. and pi. 48. f. 1.). After the publication of 

 these figiu'es he appears to have discovered their specific 

 diff'erence, and in the text distinguished that under con- 

 sideration by the new name of C. Sowerbyi. Unfortunately, 

 however, M. Kiener did not stop here ; for an inferior 

 example of the very same shell is reproduced in a subse- 

 quent plate as a new species under the title of Cypraa 

 ferruginosa. 



Had it not been for the misapplication of the word 

 maculata by Barnes, I shoidd certainly have adopted it, as 

 having been proposed, though not adopted by Mi-. Gray. 



