﻿2G8 
  Mr. 
  E. 
  A. 
  Smith 
  on 
  the 
  

  

  right 
  large, 
  the 
  left 
  small. 
  Operculum 
  none. 
  Odontophore 
  

  

  (see 
  fig.) 
  most 
  resembling 
  that 
  oiUapana 
  hulbosa 
  as 
  figured 
  by 
  

  

  Troschel 
  (' 
  Gebiss 
  der 
  Schnecken,' 
  vol. 
  ii. 
  pi. 
  xiii. 
  fio-. 
  13) 
  

  

  consisting 
  of 
  a 
  single 
  tricuspid 
  

  

  central 
  tootli 
  and 
  a 
  single 
  

  

  acute 
  curved 
  lateral. 
  The 
  

  

  central 
  tooth 
  is 
  transversely 
  

  

  elongate 
  and 
  the 
  cusps 
  are 
  

  

  nearly 
  equal 
  in 
  size, 
  short, 
  

  

  acute, 
  and 
  approximated. 
  

  

  From 
  the 
  above 
  description 
  (taken 
  from 
  spirit-specimens) 
  

   it 
  will 
  be 
  seen 
  that, 
  with 
  the 
  exception 
  of 
  the 
  odontophore 
  and 
  

   the 
  absence 
  of 
  an 
  operculum, 
  there 
  is 
  a 
  general 
  resemblance 
  

   to 
  Buccinum. 
  

  

  The 
  systematic 
  position 
  of 
  Melapium 
  has 
  naturally 
  been 
  

   variously 
  determined. 
  H. 
  and 
  A. 
  Adams 
  placed 
  it 
  in 
  the 
  

   subfamily 
  RapaninaB 
  of 
  the 
  Buccinidas, 
  between 
  the 
  genera 
  

   Separatinta 
  and 
  Rapa. 
  Tryon 
  located 
  it 
  in 
  the 
  same 
  position, 
  

   omitting 
  the 
  subfamily 
  Rapaninae, 
  which 
  he 
  included 
  in 
  the 
  

   Purpurinse. 
  Kobelt 
  unites 
  it 
  with 
  the 
  genus 
  Rapana, 
  and 
  

   Fischer 
  * 
  places 
  it 
  near 
  Tudicla 
  in 
  the 
  Turbinellidee. 
  

  

  After 
  due 
  consideration 
  I 
  believe 
  its 
  correct 
  position 
  to 
  be 
  

   between 
  Rapana 
  and 
  Coralli'ophila. 
  

  

  There 
  are 
  two 
  species 
  of 
  this 
  genus 
  at 
  present 
  known. 
  

   They 
  have 
  been 
  confounded 
  by 
  most 
  authors, 
  with 
  the 
  excep- 
  

   tion 
  of 
  Sowerby. 
  

  

  The 
  first 
  species 
  described 
  was 
  the 
  Pyrula 
  lineata 
  of 
  La- 
  

   marck. 
  This 
  I 
  believe 
  to 
  be 
  the 
  smaller 
  South- 
  African 
  

   species 
  ( 
  = 
  bulbus, 
  Wood, 
  also) 
  and 
  not 
  the 
  larger 
  form 
  figured 
  

   by 
  Kiener, 
  Reeve, 
  Chenn, 
  Tryon, 
  and 
  Kobelt, 
  which 
  is 
  

   undoubtedly 
  the 
  Pyrula 
  data 
  of 
  Schubert 
  and 
  Wagner. 
  

  

  Lamarck's 
  description 
  applies 
  in 
  every 
  particular 
  to 
  the 
  

   smaller 
  form, 
  but 
  not 
  to 
  the 
  larger. 
  The 
  size 
  (" 
  13 
  lignes 
  ") 
  

   and 
  the 
  colour 
  of 
  the 
  columella 
  (" 
  alba 
  ") 
  certainly 
  indicate 
  

   the 
  South-African 
  species, 
  and 
  no 
  mention 
  is 
  made 
  of 
  the 
  

   prominent 
  acute 
  keel 
  around 
  the 
  cauda 
  of 
  the 
  body-whorl, 
  a 
  

   feature 
  so 
  marked 
  that 
  Lamarck 
  could 
  hardly 
  have 
  failed 
  to 
  

   notice 
  it 
  had 
  it 
  existed 
  in 
  the 
  shell 
  before 
  him. 
  

  

  To 
  a 
  great 
  extent 
  Kiener 
  must 
  be 
  held 
  responsible 
  for 
  the 
  

   confusion 
  which 
  has 
  hitherto 
  existed 
  with 
  regard 
  to 
  these 
  two 
  

   species. 
  

  

  In 
  order 
  to 
  make 
  Lamarck's 
  diagnosis 
  (which 
  he 
  quotes) 
  

   agree 
  with 
  the 
  shell 
  he 
  figured 
  under 
  the 
  name 
  of 
  P. 
  lineata, 
  

   he 
  made 
  an 
  alteration, 
  the 
  columella 
  being 
  described 
  as 
  " 
  albo- 
  

   violacea 
  " 
  instead 
  of 
  " 
  alba." 
  This 
  was 
  scarcely 
  straight- 
  

  

  * 
  Journ. 
  de 
  Conch. 
  18S4, 
  vol. 
  xxxii. 
  p. 
  10; 
  Man. 
  Conch, 
  p. 
  620. 
  

  

  