MOLLUSCA OF INDIA, 81 



Proceeding further in a review of these molluscs, it is of con- 

 siderable interest to find that the anatomy of Ariophanta Icevipes is 

 of similar type, the form of the generative organs in this last- 

 named shell presenting no differences of any importance. When I 

 treated of the genus Ariophanta in Yol. I. Part III. p. 132, the 

 only animal in spirit I had for examination was one of A. immerita. 

 I am now, thanks to Mr. Phipson, in possession of A. Icevipes, the 

 type species from Bombay, and can supply the needed information. 



Ariophanta l^vipes. (Continued from Part IV. p. 134.) 



Generative organs (PI. LXXX. figs. 5-5 c). The penis is a long 

 and narrow sheath, much folded at the middle portion of its length. 

 It then divides into one rather long diverticulum (Jc), to which is 

 attached the retractor muscle ; the other is shorter, the kalk-sac, 

 joined by the vas deferens near the middle : this sac is the seat of 

 the spermatophore when in process of formation, which in the 

 specimen examined was very well seen (fig. 5 h). The spermatheca 

 (fig. 5 a) is globose, on a short narrow stem. Just above the point 

 of junction of this last appendage the main duct is coiled on itself, 

 forming a globose mass, the vas deferens coming in and uniting 

 with the ovo-testis above. The radula (PL LXXXII. figs. 4a-4cZ) 

 is arranged thus — 



120 . 2 . 8 . 1 . 8 . 2 . 120 

 130 . 1 . 130 



The centrals are rather short and stout ; the centre has strong cusps 

 on either side, the median one cusp on the outer side ; the 8th does 

 not show any. From the 9th up to the 12th the notch rises to near 

 the apex, and the following teeth outwards are all evenly bicuspid ; 

 the outermost are very small, with a single point. 



The jaw (fig. 4) has a small central projection. 



There is no doubt now that Ariophanta and Nilgiria, so far as 

 the animals are concerned, are inseparable. The sinistral growth 

 is not of any importance anatomically, and but for conchological 

 classification, which must not be overlooked, I should not pi'opose to 

 retain Nilgiria as a subgenus ; but it will facilitate the present aud 

 future understanding and arrangement of the group to concentrate 

 all these South-Indian Peninsular shells in a subfamily, the Ario- 

 phantince, retaining Ariophanta for the sinistral la'vip>es and its 

 allies and Nilgiria for the dextral species like solata, tranqueharica, 

 &c., which, as I have also shown, have no affinities with either 

 Hemiplecta or Xesta, in which they have been hitherto placed. 



Having got so far in this grouping, closer investigation of both 

 these divisions shows that the radula is not constant in character in 

 either, and that the species can be again divided into those with 

 aculeate laterals and those with bicuspid laterals. It folloAvs that 

 sinistral lampes bears the same relationship to dextral solata, 

 tranqueharica, &c., that sinistral immerita, cysis, hajadera, &c. do 

 to dextral bistrialis. The character of the odontophore being of 

 far greater weight than the coil of the shell, taking the former 



