IREDALE : OJT MISUSED GENERIC NAMES. 295 



After due consideration I conclude that the names on this tabula 

 have no systematic value, and need not concern any taxononier 

 further. Consequently J'urricula, as far as Sherborn's researches 

 have led us, was not legitimately proposed prior to 1800, and the 

 earliest user after that date will claim priority, according to the 

 Nomenclatural Laws now in use. Secondly, Cassidea, Herrmann, 

 1783, is comparable, and leaves Cassidea, Bruguiere, 1792 

 (not 1789, n.n.) valid. 



LiMACINA. 



The authority for this name is generally given as Cuvier, but in the 

 Regne Animal, vol. ii, 1817 (but really published December, 1816), 

 p. 380, only the vernacular appears. Consequently a later legitimate 

 user is required, and the earliest seems to be Lamarck, who, in the 

 Anim. sans Vert., vol. vi, pt. i (February-June), 1819, p. 290, 

 correctly introduced Limacina, with the sole species X. helicialis = 

 Clio heliciiia, Gmal. = Arffonaiita arctica, 0. Fabiicius. No one seems 

 to liave hitherto worried about this, nor about Blainville's genus 

 Spiratella. In the Diet. Sci. Nat. (Levrault), vol. xxxii, 1H24, in 

 his monumental article on the MoUusca, the basis of his later Manuel, 

 Blainville used Spiratella, p. 284, with the " Observ. Nous avons tire 

 les caracteres de ce genre surtout de I'ouvrage de M. Scoresby. II est 

 etabli sur un animal presque microscopique des niers arctiques, dont 

 M. Cuvier a fait son genre Limacine, adopte par M. de Lamarck ". 



In the 50th volume of the same Dictionnaire, published in 1827, at 

 the word " Spiratelle. Spiratella'", there is the following claim: 

 "Genre de mollusques, etabli pour le clio helicina de Linne, et que 

 MM. Cuvier et de Lamarck out nomme limaqine : denomination que 

 M. de Blainville n'a pas adoptee, d'abord pour eviter la confusion 

 que I'analogie de nom avec celui de limace pourroit occasioner, et 

 ensuite parce qu'il avoit propose celui de spiratelle avant la publication 

 de I'ouvrage de M. Cuvier." 



It was necessary to investigate Blainville's claim for priority, but 

 I was unable to locate the name without recourse to Sherborn's MS. 

 for the second part of his Index Aniirialium. I was gratified to find 

 that, as usual, he had noted it in a place I had overlooked. For in 

 the 9th volume of the .same Dictionnaire, published in 1817, 

 Blainville under tlie word Clio, after describing two species in detail, 

 distributed the other species of known Clio, concluding (p. 407) with 

 "Quant au clio helicina, j'en ai fait le genre Spikatella. Voyez ce 

 mot". Consequently Blainville's Spiratella has absolutely priority, 

 and being exactly equivalent with Lamarck's Limacina, must 

 displace it. 



In the Journ. de Physique, vol. Ixxxv, p. 391, November, 1817, 

 after Lesueur's genus Atlanta, Blainville adds, " Ce genre nousparoit 

 avoir beaucoup de rapports avec le Clio helicina de Gmelin, qui 

 se trouve en si grande abondance dans les mers du Nord, et dont nous 

 avons fait le genre Spiratelle dans notre Genera Molluscorum de 

 V Encyclopedie Britannique^ It does seem unfortunate that such 

 a valuable contribution should have been rejected by both French 

 and English (including Scotch) authorities. 



