NERITA. 403 
of the inner lip being peculiarly marked in that shell, and by 
no means conspicuously so m the other. 
Both these figures were repudiated in the ‘Museum Ulrice,’ 
and Argenville’s plate 10, f P, substituted for them; this 
synonym, however, was continued in the twelfth edition of the 
‘Systema.’ That figure exhibits a large species with a pecu- 
liarly depressed spire, features at variance with the “parva” 
and ‘‘ spira—elongata” of the ‘Museum ;’ its painting and size 
remind one of N. ziczac in Sowerby’s ‘ Thesaurus.’ 
Naturalists in general have wisely retained the specific appel- 
lation for the shell which was apparently intended in the tenth 
edition; and their selection is justified by the preservation of 
specimens of it (Geve, Conchylien, f. 250, 252, or Schrét. Einl. 
pl. 4, f. 14) in the box thus marked in the Linnean cabinet. 
Nothing which resembles the shell depicted by Argenville is 
present in the collection. It is not improbable that more 
than one species was confused in the ‘Museum Ulrice;’ the 
markings there described are not habitual to N. virginea, for 
which reason, probably, Récluz, who may not have been aware 
how often the shell of the ‘Museum’ was different from that of 
-the ‘Systema,’ has rejected the Linnean virginea, which he 
considers (Journ. Conch.) to be compounded of ziczac and 
zebra, aS a species, and has bestowed the name Brasiliana 
(Rev. Zool.) upon its traditional representative (Sow. Thes. 
Conch. ii. Ner. f. 236, 7). 
guervita polita. 
The major portion, if not the whole, of the pictorial synonyms 
was so clearly designed for the Nerita polita of authors (Mawe, 
Conch. pl. 30, f. 1) that, despite the “labiis utrisque dentatis” 
(modified, however, in the ‘Museum Ulrice’ to “ Labium ex- 
terius —intus crenatum, absque dentibus prominentibus”), 
naturalists have unanimously selected that shell as the repre- 
sentative of the Linnean species. It is not desirable to op- 
pose the accepted opinion, since, whatever may have been the 
shell originally designed, the unsupported description of the 
‘Systema’ is much too brief to define it; moreover, there is a 
fair probability that the same Nerite was intended as in the 
