96 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETr. 



With this species Martel & Dautzenberg have united R. Giraudi, 

 R. Jouherti, R. Monceti, R. pyramidalis, and R. Bridouxiana, all of 

 }3oiirguiguat (ii, iii), and this decision is probably correct, but without 

 seeing actual examples of each form it is difficult to give a decided 

 opinion. I have, however, a strong belief that their decision will 

 prove well-founded. R. Foai is probably another variety (Mabille, 

 Bull. Soc. Philom. Paris, 1901, vol. iii, p. 57). 



GiEAUDiA MINOR (Smith). Fig. 4. 



Reymondia minor, Smith : iii, 1889, vol. iv, p. 174. 



Giraudia minor, Ancey : Bull. Soc. zool. France, 1894, vol. xix, p. 28. 



GiEAUDiA Tanganticensis (Smith). Fig. 5. 



Reymondia Tang any ice^isis, Smith : iii, 1889, vol. iv, p. 175. 

 Giraudia Tanganikana, Ancey : Bull. Soc. zool. France, 1894, vol. xix, 

 p. 28. 



Lekoya. 



Leroya, Grandidier : Bull. Soc. malac. France, 1887, vol. iv, p. 191. 

 Leroya, Bourguignat : ii, p. 17, pi. vi, figs. 2-5; iii, p. 78; Moll. 



Afrique Equator., 1889, p. 180. 

 Leroya, as a group of Lanistes, Martens : p. 170. 



This genus may be synonymous with Lanistes, but the two species 

 described, L. Bourguignati and L. Charmetanti, are more solid than 

 other species of that genus, but the opercula are similar. Both forms 

 are considered by Martens merely varieties of Lanistes Farleri of Craven, 

 but of this location I do not feel certain. The greater solidity of 

 their shells and the different character of their peristome seem to 

 distinguish them. 



Leeota Bourguignati, Grandidier. 



Leroya Bourguignati, Grandidier: Bull. Soc. malac. France, 1887, 



vol. iv, p. 192. 

 Leroya Bourguignati, Bourguignat : ii, pi. vi, figs. 2-5 ; iii, p. 79 ; 



Moll. Afrique Equator., 1889, p. 180. 

 Lanistes Farleri, Craven, var. : Martens, p. 172, pi. vi, fig. 34. 

 Leroya C/wrwe^«w<i, Grandidier : I.e., p. 93; Bourguignat, Moll. Afrique 



Equator., 1889, p. 150, pi. vii, figs. 21, 22. 



Syrnolopsis. 



Syrnolopsis, Smith ; iii, p. 426 ; Crosse, p. 118 ; Bourguignat, i, p. 16 ; 

 iii, p. 139; Martens, p. 210. 



Eight species of this genus have been described, but, as far as I can 

 judge from the descriptions and figures, they might be restricted to 

 two, namely, S. lacustris and S. carinifera. 



M. Bourguignat does certainlj- point out certain differences in form 

 and in the number of lirse within the aperture, but it seems to me 

 possible that these characters may in some measure be due to differ- 

 ence of age. The other names are Syrnolopsis Ancey ana, Giraudi, 



