MUREX. 309 
over, is not present in his collection. Neither of the two 
figures previously cited as illustrative were satisfactory repre- 
sentations: they display nearly an equal resemblance to muri- 
catum and radula: Argenyille’s drawing reminds us of the 
latter by its narrow form and crowded knobs; Gualtier’s by the 
numerous series of granules. 
Murex torulosa, 
No additional information upon this species is to be obtained 
from the collection or manuscripts of our author, who did not 
possess an example, but appears to have drawn up his account 
of it from the recorded specimen in Gyllenborg’s collection. 
Although the description was not illustrated by any synonymy, 
the indicated features, however few in number, were so peculiar 
that they ensured the determination of the species. The 
Cerithium toruloswm (Chemn. Conch. Cab. vol. x. pl. 164, f.1575, 
1576), being the only known shell which exhibited the required 
characteristics, has been recognised for the Linnean Mure, and 
the general assent of writers (Karsten must be excepted) has 
ratified the identification. 
Murex radula, 
The quoted figure of Gualtier represents, apparently, a 
decorticated example of the Cerithiwm granulatum (as depicted 
by Kiener): hence Born has selected that shell as the repre- 
sentative of the Linnean species. The expression “ striis 
duplici serie punctatis” suits not fittingly a shell which is 
almost invariably adorned with at least three rows of raised 
dots; an immature decorticated example, however (Born, Test. 
Mus. Vind. pl. 11, f. 16, nearly), in the Linnean collection, in 
which two central rows of raised white dots are alone con- 
spicuous (the infrasutural series being indistinct), so fairly 
agrees with the described characters that one may readily 
believe that our author described the species from this un- 
characteristic individual. Assuredly no other object in the 
