62 Trans. Acad. Sci. of St. Louis. 



Anodonta harpethensis J^Q2i. Trans. Am. Philos. Soc, 

 2d series, Vol. VIII, p. 224, PL XIX, Fig. 42 ; Reeve, 

 Conchologia Iconica, Vol. XVII, Anoclon Plate XXI, 

 Fig. 82, 1869. Described from the Harpeth river, 

 Temiessee. 



Anodonta UnnceanaJjea. Trans. Am. Philos. Soc, 2d 

 series, Vol. X, 1852, p. 289, PL XXVII, Fig. 51; 

 Reeve, Conchologia Iconica, Vol. XVII, Aiiodon Plate 

 XXXV, Fig. 144. Described from Lake Concordia, 

 Louisiana. 



Anodonta virens Lea. Trans. Am. Philos. Soc, 2d 

 series. Vol. X, 1852, p. 290, PL XXVIII, Fig. 53; 

 Reeve, Conchologia Iconica, Vol. XVII, Anodon Plate 

 XXXIV, Fig. 138. This form was described from the 

 Red river, near Alexandria, Louisiana. Through some 

 curious blunder Reeve says ** River Euphrates." 



Anodonta gesneri Lea. Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 

 2d series, 1859, p. 231, PL XXXI, Fig. 109; Reeve, 

 Conchologia Iconica, Vol. XVII, Anodon Plate VII, Fig. 

 15. Described from the Uphaupee creek, Macon County, 

 Georgia. 



Anodonta inornata Anthony. Am. Jour, of Con- 

 chology. Vol. II, 1866, p. 145. Teste Lea. 

 This is, without doubt, the most abused American Anodonta. 

 Of wide distribution it is one of the most polymorphous shells 

 found on the continent. A number of years ago attention 

 was called to this variant shell, and some of the synonymy 

 here indicated definitely was there hinted at.* There is 

 scarcely a stream in all the great Mississippi Valley but that in 

 it some form of this abundant shell occurs. In outline every 

 one of the forms given above may be found in every lot which 

 numbers forty or fifty specimens, and if the old and the young 

 are taken and compared, all the forms from gigantea to ovata 

 and virens may be obtained. It has fared rather better than 

 the European Anodonta cygnea, of which over one hundred and 

 twenty synonyms are known, but by the time it has had atten- 

 tion equal to that of its European congener, it may fare as badly. 



* American Naturalist, Vol. XIV, 1880, pp. 529-530. 



