BUCCINUM. 255 
“anfractibus obsoletis,” and still more the entire description 
and cited delineations in the ‘Museum Ulrice,’ clearly belong 
to the former alone. Hence the misguiding references to 
Klein and Lister must be erased; the latter, indeed, was 
expunged by Linneus himself, in his revised copy, where the 
columella was more fittingly described as “ canaliculata.” The 
A. glabrata is still preserved in his cabinet, where it ex- 
clusively agrees with the amended definition. The reference 
to Columna, whose rude figure seems designed for Bucconum 
mutabile, must also be expunged. 
Brucciwiiw prxrosant, 
The Melanopsis prerosa (plate 2, fig. 5) still remains in the 
marked receptacle of this species in the Linnean cabinet. 
Although the examples are small, and peculiarly eroded at 
the apex, they still exhibit the characteristic retusion beneath 
the sutures, which distinguishes this Spanish species from its 
Grecian and Syriac congener M. Buccinoides. Férussac, how- 
ever, in his Monograph of the genus Melanopsis, from not 
regarding this peculiarity as of essential importance, has indi- 
cated the Linnean shell as a mere varietal form of the latter, 
which is synonymous with the M. levigata of Lamarck, a species 
whose very brief diagnosis might, indeed, comprehend in it the 
M. prerosa, but whose pictorial definition restricts it to that far 
better known Melanopsis. The name as originally written was 
premorsum. 
Bucci wndDosaiunt. 
The Buccinum undosum of Kiener’s Monograph (Coq. Viv. 
Buc. f. 41) is present in the Linnean cabinet, and best, if not 
solely, agrees with the definition of this species. Klein repre- 
sents the Triton clandestinus, which suits not the “ obtuse quin- 
quangulari” of the diagnosis; the other synonyms bear much 
more resemblance to the species, and have been generally 
accepted for representations of it. The details in the ‘Museum 
