OSTREA. 109 
as equivalent to “inzquiaurita,” it would be incorrectly applied 
to that species. 
Ostrea Varta. 
The Pecten varius (Sow. Thes. vol. i. Pect. f. 214) has uni- 
versally been accepted as the representative of this species, and 
with great probability, since it perfectly agrees with all the 
features specified in the description. The locality, however, 
is erroneous, and the cited figure, though suggestive of its 
features, and even possibly designed for it, very rude. ‘The 
reference to “ Argen. Conch. t. 27 (= 24 of the earlier edition), 
f. H,” and “ Penn. Zool. iv. t. 61, f. 64” in the manuscript of 
the younger Linné, supports the received opinion. “ Scabrities 
echinata e squamis fornicatis” has been written by our author 
in his own copy of the ‘Systema ’ 
Pecten varius (Donovy. Brit. Shells, vol. i. pl. 1, f. 1) occupies 
the box marked for the species in the Linnean cabinet. 
Ostrea pusto, 
I cannot find a specimen in the entire collection of our 
author which perfectly coincides with the details given in the 
‘Museum Ulrice.’ The marked receptacle of the species in 
the Linnean cabinet has unfortunately been converted into a 
general depository for all the loose valves of the smaller Pectens 
(to which genus the pusio undoubtedly belongs), and the descrip- 
tions, without perfectly agreeing with either, would equally apply 
to two shells present, the pusio of the British writers and the 
albolineatus of Sowerby’s Monograph. The “color operculi albus 
striis nigris venisque albis undatis” is peculiarly suitable to the 
latter; but by no means appropriate for the former, neither, 
indeed, is “ auricula altera maxime obsoleta’’: the lower valve, 
however, is not “albus.” In the same box reposes a white 
valve of the young Islandicus, and it is not impossible that our 
author, scarcely any of whose Pectens are in pairs, may have 
imagined that it appertained to the more richly coloured 
superior valve. In that case the description of Linnzus would 
