90 MEMOIRS OF THE CARNEGIE MUSEUM. 



We have here the curious fact that a species is not found at its type locahty. 

 It should be noted, however, that this species is present in tributaries of the lake, 

 chiefly in the Maumee (Goodrich, 1914) substantiated by specimens in the Carnegie 

 Museum. 



Although Call (1895 and 1900) cites western New York and the Ottawa 

 River,' Canada, for this species, there is serious doubt whether it goes so far north 

 and northeast. No exact localities are known in the Allegheny River in the state 

 of New York, nevertheless this species might be there, since it has been reported 

 from Warren Co., Pennsylvania, and is positively found immediately below in 

 Forest Co. Its main range includes the Ohio, Cumberland, and Tennessee systems, 

 chiefly in their tributaries. It is widely distributed in these drainages in western 

 Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia, Kentuckj^, Tennessee, and northern 

 Alabama. In Ohio and Indiana it surely crosses over into the lake-drainage, St. 

 Marys and Maumee Rivers (Call, 1900, and Sterki, 1907a, also collected by C. 

 Goodrich). Nevertheless it has not been reported from Lakes Erie and Michigan 

 (See Walker, 1898 and 1913). Remarkably enough, while it is widely distributed 

 in Indiana (Call, 1896a and 1900), it is listed from Illinois (by Baker, 1906) only 

 from the Wabash. Its actual absence in the rest of Illinois is confirmed by the 

 recent investigations of Wilson and Clark. According to them it is in Tippecanoe 

 Lake (Wabash-drainage) in Indiana, but not in the Kankakee-drainage in Indiana 

 and Illinois. West of Illinois, only three records are at hand (from Iowa City, 

 Iowa; St. Peters River, Minnesota; and Nebraska), which, however, are very 

 likely incorrect (Simpson, 1900, p. 746 seems to have no confidence in them, and 

 Geiser (1910) does not give this shell from northeastern Iowa). No other records 

 are known from west of the Mississippi. 



In the Tennessee-drainage, this species surely goes to northern Alabama. 

 In the upper Tennessee region it is missing but there are a number of closely allied 

 species or forms, the standing of which will be elucidated elsewhere; also in the 

 Coosa-Alabama-drainage there are representatives, which have been taken for 

 synonyms, for instance by Call. But this surely is incorrect, and requires further 

 study. 



It is not known, whether this species outside of Pennsylvania inhabits pre- 

 ferably the smaller streams, except that it is surely present in them in West Virginia. 



