VENERID_E. 113 
only other British species that has been handed over to 
Artemis. 
The genus Pullastra of Sowerby is maintained, though 
M. Deshayes says that the differences between it and Venus 
are still less than in Cytherea. We do not concur in this 
opinion, as that eminent naturalist has overlooked the byssal 
groove, which essential character, with the general aspect of 
the group, throwing in as a make-weight the slenderness and 
parallelism of the teeth, have determined us to adopt it as 
sufficiently well based on organization. 
The animals of this family are so extremely similar, that 
we call in aid their shell-specialties to assist in constituting 
sections, to facilitate a divisional arrangement for easy identi- 
fication. The first section comprises the typical Veneres, 
which have three strong teeth in each valve; the second sec- 
tion contains those with four teeth in one valve and three in 
the other, with a hollow or pit as the receptacle of the isolated 
tooth; these are those which authors have deposited in Cy- 
therea and Artemis. 
The hard parts of all the species are of very strong and 
compact texture; their shape is either orbicular tumid and 
lentiform, or a more or less elongated oval; all have deep 
siphonal cicatrices, and none have lateral teeth, unless the 
isolated one of the second section be considered a vestige of 
one. The animal of Venus has no byssal groove, but I be- 
lieve that of Pullastra has always that appendage. But these 
remarks need not be extended, as it will be seen by the 
specialty descriptions that there are few peculiarities in this 
old aristocratic family, in which there is little more to do than 
to rmg the changes on trivial points. 
As I have mentioned the terms Veneride and Cytherea, 
and in another place the genera Solenicurtus and Venerirupis, 
it may not be improper to make a few remarks on the incor- 
rect Latinization of nomenclatural appellations. This essen- 
tial appendage of natural history is admitted by all not to be 
in a satisfactory position, and I will not go beyond the present 
pages to demonstrate the truth of these opinions: It is the 
custom of authors to write Venerupis for Venerirupis, Sole- 
1 
