123 SPECIES OF THE SYSTEMA. 
Anonita Watelltfornis. 
This species, more largely described by Linneus in the 
second edition of the ‘ Fauna Suecica,’ is likewise delineated and 
fully characterised by him in the first volume of the ‘ Upsala 
Transactions’ (1773, pl. 5, f. 6, 7). From the language of the 
‘Fauna’ I should have thought it the Anomia striata of Lovén, 
from the figure and the expression “ strigee numerose distantes 
convex” of the ‘ Acta,’ the A. undulata of authors, which 
identification is that accepted by Lovén; both, however, are 
said by no mean authority (Gray) to be identical. 
Specimens of wndulata (Chemn. Conch. Cab. vol. viii. pl. 77, 
f. 699), moreover, are wrapped up in a paper thus labelled in the 
Linnean Cabinet, into which, however, they were only intro- 
duced by the younger Linné, who has declared his possession 
of the species. His father has not enumerated it among those 
recorded as belonging to himself. 
Anomta seobinata. 
Four features only are mentioned in the description of this 
shell; the two latter are generic, and the two former do not 
answer to the characters of the shell delineated by Gualtier. 
It was impossible for naturalists to determine the species from 
such a definition ; hence Lamarck, Deshayes, and other modern 
writers have wisely consigned it to its merited oblivion. Chem- 
nitz, more venturesome, has figured for it a Terebratula (the 
genus is not doubtful), but his shell (whatever it may have been 
meant for (designed perhaps for 7’. truncata) so far from being 
“levi,” is conspicuously ribbed: even Gmelin, no harsh critic, 
has queried it as a synonym. That laborious compiler prefers 
the engraving selected by Schroéter as a representation, namely, 
the Ter. truncata, a most natural selection at a time when 
figures, not description, seem to have been the criterion for 
recognitions. For Gualtier’s engraving is a rude representa- 
tion of that well-known shell, and the name scobinata was 
