﻿310 
  Mr. 
  E. 
  A. 
  Smith 
  on 
  the 
  Genus 
  Lobiger. 
  

  

  1847. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Krohn, 
  Ann. 
  Sci. 
  nat. 
  stir. 
  3, 
  Zool. 
  vol. 
  vii. 
  

  

  p. 
  52, 
  pi. 
  ii. 
  figs. 
  1-4 
  (animal 
  and 
  shell). 
  

   1850. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Souleyet, 
  Journ. 
  de 
  Conch, 
  vol. 
  i. 
  p. 
  232, 
  pi. 
  x. 
  

  

  figs. 
  13, 
  14 
  (shell). 
  

   1850. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  A. 
  Adams, 
  in 
  Sowerby's 
  Thesaur. 
  Conch. 
  

  

  vol. 
  ii. 
  pp. 
  598 
  and 
  602, 
  pi. 
  cxix. 
  fig. 
  18 
  (animal), 
  pi. 
  cxxi. 
  fig. 
  57 
  

  

  (shell). 
  

   1856. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Fischer, 
  Journ. 
  de 
  Conch, 
  vol. 
  v. 
  p. 
  274. 
  

   1858. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  H. 
  & 
  A. 
  Adams, 
  Gen. 
  Moll. 
  ii. 
  p. 
  31, 
  pi. 
  lix. 
  

  

  figs. 
  2, 
  2 
  a 
  (animal 
  and 
  shell). 
  

  

  1853. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Philippi, 
  Handbuch 
  Conch, 
  und 
  Malacol. 
  p. 
  227. 
  

  

  1854. 
  Lobiger 
  pellucidus, 
  A. 
  Adams, 
  Proc. 
  Zool. 
  Soc. 
  1854, 
  p. 
  94. 
  

   1854. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Woodward, 
  Man. 
  Moll. 
  p. 
  186, 
  pi. 
  xiv. 
  fig. 
  16 
  

  

  (shell). 
  

   1856. 
  Lobiger 
  pellucidus, 
  Fischer, 
  Journ. 
  de 
  Conch, 
  vol. 
  v. 
  p. 
  274. 
  

  

  1858. 
  Lophocercus 
  pellucidus, 
  II. 
  & 
  A. 
  Adams, 
  Gen. 
  Moll. 
  vol. 
  ii. 
  p. 
  31. 
  

  

  1859. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Chenu, 
  Man. 
  Conch, 
  p. 
  394, 
  figs. 
  2993, 
  2994 
  

   (animal 
  and 
  shell). 
  

  

  1859. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Gray, 
  Fig. 
  Moll. 
  vol. 
  iv. 
  pi. 
  clxxvi. 
  figs. 
  1,1a 
  

   (animal), 
  fig. 
  1 
  b 
  (shell). 
  

  

  1863. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Morch, 
  Journ. 
  de 
  Conch, 
  vol. 
  xi. 
  p. 
  47. 
  

  

  1863. 
  Lobiger 
  corneus, 
  Morch, 
  /. 
  c. 
  p. 
  48. 
  

  

  1863. 
  Oxynoe 
  pellucidus, 
  Morch, 
  /. 
  c. 
  p. 
  46. 
  

  

  1868. 
  Lobiger 
  1 
  hilippii, 
  Weinkauff. 
  Conch. 
  Mittelm. 
  vol. 
  ii. 
  p. 
  180. 
  

  

  1868. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii; 
  Pease, 
  Am. 
  J. 
  Conch, 
  vol. 
  iv. 
  p. 
  75. 
  

  

  1860. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Petit 
  de 
  la 
  Saussaye, 
  Cat. 
  Moll. 
  test, 
  mers 
  

   d'Europe, 
  p. 
  265. 
  

  

  1870. 
  Lobiger 
  Serradifalci, 
  Aradas 
  & 
  Benoit, 
  Conch. 
  Viv. 
  Mar. 
  Sicil. 
  

  

  p. 
  138. 
  

   1878. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Kobelt, 
  Tllust. 
  Conchylienb. 
  p. 
  176, 
  pi. 
  lix. 
  

  

  fig. 
  29 
  (shell). 
  

   1883. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Tryon, 
  Syst. 
  Struct. 
  Conch, 
  vol. 
  ii. 
  p. 
  363, 
  

  

  pi. 
  Ixxxix. 
  figs. 
  65, 
  06 
  (animal 
  and 
  shell). 
  

   1883. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Fischer, 
  Man. 
  Conch, 
  p. 
  571, 
  pi. 
  xiv. 
  fig. 
  16 
  

  

  (shell). 
  

   1885. 
  Lobiger 
  Philippii, 
  Vayssiere, 
  Ann. 
  Mus. 
  Hist. 
  Nat. 
  Marseille, 
  

  

  vol. 
  ii. 
  niem. 
  3, 
  pp. 
  100-102 
  and 
  177, 
  pi. 
  ii. 
  figs. 
  48-50 
  bis 
  (animal, 
  

  

  radula, 
  and 
  shell). 
  

  

  Hob. 
  Sicily 
  (Calcara, 
  Krohn, 
  and 
  others); 
  Gulf 
  of 
  Mar- 
  

   seilles 
  (Vayssiere). 
  

  

  It 
  has 
  been 
  pointed 
  out 
  by 
  Petit 
  in 
  the 
  first 
  instance, 
  and 
  

   afterwards 
  by 
  Aradas 
  and 
  Benoit, 
  that 
  the 
  Bullea 
  Serradi- 
  

   falci, 
  named 
  by 
  Calcara 
  in 
  honour 
  of 
  the 
  Duke 
  of 
  Serradi- 
  

   falco 
  (a 
  small 
  town 
  in 
  Sicily), 
  is 
  the 
  same 
  as 
  L. 
  Philipirii 
  of 
  

   Krohn, 
  and 
  T 
  am 
  of 
  opinion 
  that 
  this 
  identification 
  is 
  correct. 
  

  

  L. 
  pellucidus 
  of 
  A. 
  Adams, 
  described 
  without 
  locality 
  and 
  

   from 
  shell-characters 
  only, 
  is 
  not 
  to 
  be 
  separated 
  from 
  the 
  

   present 
  species. 
  The 
  types 
  in 
  the 
  Museum 
  show 
  this, 
  and 
  

   consequently 
  prove 
  that 
  the 
  brothers 
  Adams, 
  and 
  Morch 
  after 
  

   them, 
  were 
  wrong 
  in 
  referring 
  the 
  species 
  to 
  Lophocercus 
  or 
  

   Oxynoe. 
  

  

  