96 zoxiTiD.!:. 



whorls 5g, slightly eomex above, the last uot descending, rounded 

 at the periphery, moderately convex beneath ; aperture slightly 

 oblique, broadly lunate ; peristome thin in one plane, the colurael- 

 lar margin curved, oblique, never quite vertical, carried forward 

 and briefly reflected above. 



Major diam. 18|, min. 16, height 8| mm. 



Hah. Lower Bengal, common at Calcutta. This species is also 

 said to be found in Nylhet to the eastward and in Orissa to the 

 south ; other reported localities ai*e more doubtful. I have seen 

 shells closely resembling M. indicn from Karnul and from Ceylon, 

 but the sculpture is finer and indistinct. 



Animal purphsh grey not black, elongate ; " the right shell-lobe 

 small, the left is narrowly reflected over the edge of the peristome, 

 and at the basal side gives off a short tongue-like process " ; right 

 dorsal lobe narrow and elongate, the left in two distinct portions. 

 In the genitalia a moderately long cylindrical blunt kale-sac is 

 given off at the junction of the vas deferens, and the c?ecum of the 

 penis, to which the retractor muscle is attached, is sharply coiled. 

 The dart-sac is long, the spermatheca short and elongately pear- 

 shaped. The radula contains about 88 rows of teeth, with the 

 arrangement : 34 . 2 . 9 . 1 . 9 . 2 . 34 (45 . 1 . 45). 



This species and M. pctrosa Avere for a long time identified with 

 Helix viirinoides, Desh. (Mag. Zool. 1831, p. 26), a shell of un- 

 known origin and described as imperforate. The original figure 

 given of H. vitnnoides has no great resemblance to eitlier of the 

 Indian species, but Benson's undescribed Macroclilamys indicn, 

 identified with the present form by some writers, appears to have 

 been the same as Hutton' s Nanina j)etrosa, though, as it was said to 

 occur from Calcutta to Cawnpore, it may have comprised the 

 present species also. Nevill's N. pseudovitrinoides was not 

 described and was only identified as "the common snail" through- 

 out the Gangetic Delta and distinct from JV. petrosa. As more 

 than one Macrocldamys is common in the Gangetic Delta, it is 

 uncertain to which Nevill's name belongs. The first complete 

 description of the present species is that by Col. Godwin-Austen, 

 and his name M. indica is accepted, although the shell is not the 

 same as Benson's J/, indica, \^hich was never described. No 

 confusion with Euplccia indica, Pfr. (p. 60), is possible, as that 

 belongs to a distinct genus. 



a'. Longitudinal fexuous imjrreb'sed sculpture. 



139. Macrochlamys petrosa, Hutton (Helix?), J. A. S. B. iii, 1834, 

 p. 83 ; Pfi: (Helix) Mon. Hel. i, 1847, p. oG ; Bs. (Helix) 

 A. M. K. H. (-2) ii, 1848, p. 163 ; H. ^- T. (Helix) C. I. 1876, 

 pi. 88, figs. 7, 1(), pp. viii, 37 ; Nevill, Nanina (Mficrochlam3's), 

 Hand-l. i, 1878, p. '2\ ; Godiinn-Ai(sten, Mol. Ind. i, 1883, pp. 96, 

 99, pi. 19, figs. 1, 1 « (animal), pi. 21. fio-. o (sculpture), pi. 22, 

 tig. 1 (shell). 

 Helix (Macrochlamys) indicus, Bs. J. A. S'. B, i, 1832, p. 76; a 

 mere name, without description. 



