410 William Evans Hoyle: 



Heteroteuthis, Verrill, 1880. H. tencra, Vll. Is80 [monotypicj f= Seiuirossin). 



Histioceraeus Steenstrup. 1880 \noiiicH nudum, iio species mentioned |. 



Histiopsis Hoylo, 1885. H. atlantica, Hoyle, 1885 [monotypic] (= Histioteitthis) '^ 



Histioteuf/n's, d'Orbigiiy, 1846. Cranchid honcUii, Ferussac, 1835 [monotypic |.'-^ 



Hoijled. de Kochebrime. 18s(>. HaJIin urpioidea Valeiiciennes. MS. 



HyaloteHthis, Gray, 1849. Sepia ptlagka, Bosc. 1802 [monotypic]. 



Hyaloteutbis, Pfeffer, 1884. LoUgops'is vermicidans, Küppell. 1844 |monot>pic| (^ Doratopsix). 



Idiosepius, Steenstrup, 1881. I. pygmacuyi, Stp., 1881 (monotypic). 



Illex, Steenstrup, 1880. LoUgo illecehrosa, Lesueur, 1821 [species lirst nanied.['* 



Jnpetella, Hoyle, 1885. ./. prhmatica, Hoyle, 1885 [monotypic]. Brit. Mus. ! 



Le<irhia, Lesueur. 1821. L. cgclura, Lesueur. 1821 [monotypic]. 



Lepidoteuthis, Joubin, 1895. L. grimaldü, Joubin, 1895 [monotypic]. 



Leptoteuthis, Verrill, 1884. L. dkqihuna, Vll.. lsS4 |sp. first iiamed.].'^ 



Lestoteutbis, Verrill, 1880. Onychoteuthis kamtschatiai, Middendorf, 1849 (designation) (^Gottatiis). 



lAorrauchia, Pfeffer, 1884. L. brockii, Pfeffer, 1884 [sp. first named.]. 



Lituina, Link, 1806. Nautilus f;2)irul<i. Linn.. 1758 |nionoty])ic] (^= Sjnrirffr). 



Lituus, Gray, 1849. L- lacüis, Gray, 1849 |sp. first mentioned) (^ Spivula).^^ 



LoWßOf Schneider, 1784. L. imlguris, Lamarck. 179N |sp. first named].'' 



LolUfopsis, Lamarck, 1812. L. pcronii, Lmk.. 1812 | monotypicj. 



Lolioliis, Steenstrup, 1856. L. typiis, Stp.. 1856 [designation]." 



LolUffiittruIa, Steenstrup. 1881. Loligo birvis, Blainville, 1823 [monotypic]. 



Li/rofeufhis, Pfeffer, 1900. L.juUai, Pfr., 1900 [monoty])ic]. Hamburg Mus.! '" 



Martialia, Kocbebrune i^- Mobille, 1889. 31. hyadesi, M. tt li., 1889 [monotypic] (= J)o.sidicus). 



'* Histiopsis is^beyond all reasonable doubt the young of some species of Uistioteuthis. 



" d'Orbigny calls this species " BonelliaiKi'' but there seems no reason to depart from the t'nvm uriginally 

 pi'oposed by Ferussac. 



'* In default df any other indication I venture to designate the species first named by Steenstrup as the type 

 of the genus. 



'^ The name is preoccupied ; = Doratopsis de Rochebrune, 1884. 



'" So far as I can ascertain Gray is the first post-Linnean writer to iise Lituus in a generir sense with any 

 definition on indication The word occurs in the ..Museum Calonnianum", p. 62, but withoiit definition and among the 

 „Terrestres" or land molhisca. The word was also used by Martyn „Universal Conchologist" in 178-1. fig 27. for a 

 Pulmonate. 



'• In determining what should be regarded as the type of this genus I have been guided hy the following con- 

 siderations. The genus was created by Schneider (1784), but he does not mention any type though his opening sentence 

 ip. HO) „Dies soll nach LinnS die große Art des Rondelet und Needham sein" leaves no doubt that he had the 

 Sepia luligo of Linn6 in mind. The difficulty consists in knowing what species this was. I have looked up the various 

 authorities referred to by Linn6 iind find that they include a great variety of forms ; in fact they comprise all those 

 with cyündrical body and Ans. Pennant (1777) does not help us for though his figure ipl. 27, is an undoubted Loligo 

 (I believe L. forbesi Stp.) his referencts show that his Sepia loligo like that of Linn6 included also forms referable 

 to ümmastrephes. Lamarck (1798, 1799) erects a genus Loligo, apparently independent of Schneider, but with the 

 same characters. and names his first species L vulgaris, with the remark .11 est vraisemblable que Linn^ n'a point 

 connu cette espfece". Under these circumstances the only reasonable plan occurs to nie to be to regard L. vulgaris 

 Lamk. as the type of his genus and therefore of that of Schneider. This is practically what has been done hy most 

 subsequent writers though I am not aware that anyone has stated the fact in so many words. 



'" The names (typus and affiiiisl givi-n to the two species first described leave no doubt as to which the 

 author regarded as the type. 



'" rfeffer has recently identified this species with Enoploteuthis diaderna Chun, 1900. 



