probable that Currier included the species in his catalogue on 
Miles’ authority, as there are no Michigan specimens of this 
species in his collection at the present time. DeCamp’s spe- 
cimens labeled ‘‘//matul/us” are in my possession and are 
Z. arboreus (Say). I think therefore, that every citation of 
this species as a resident of Michigan has been practically 
disproved. It is possible, however, that it may yet be found 
along our southern border, as according to Call it is ‘* gener- 
ally distributed ” in Indiana. 
SUCCINEA OVALIS HIGGINSI Bld. 
Judging from the original figure and description, it seems 
questionable whether this is more than a dentate variety of 
S. retusa Lea. A similar form of the European |S. pudris_L. 
has been noticed by Baudon. No dentate specimens of Suc- 
cineca from Michigan have been seen and the edentulous form 
doubtfully referred in prior lists to this species should be 
placed elsewhere. It follows that the species should be 
dropped from the Michigan list. 
SUCCINEA CAMPESTRIS (Say). 
The obviously erroneous citation of this species by Sager 
and Miles was caused, so Dr. Miles states in his report to the 
Census, by following Gould’s error, in the first edition of the 
Invertebrata of Massachusetts, of referring S. ob/¢qua to cam- 
pestris. 
SUCCINEA AUREA Lea. 
Cited by DeCamp, whose specimens, now in my posses- 
sion, are young ve/usda. 
PUPA DECORA (Gld.) 
Cited by DeCamp from Kent county, but his specimens 
proved to be the types of a new species, Vertigo morsel 
Sterki. 
HELICELLA VIRGATA DaCosta. 
A single dead specimen of this species said to have been 
collected at Flint was in the Lathrop collection (See Naut. 
WES p.sl25)). 
[Nore—There are two species of operculate land shells 
found in the state, viz: Pomatiopsis lapidarta (Say) and P. 
cincinnatiensis (Lea). But it has been thought best to omit 
them from the present list as they more naturally group with 
the other operculate species, which are all fluviatile. ] 
ied 
wh 
