300 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



ToRNATiNA, A. Adams. 



I cannot see liow this name can be retained under the present 

 nsape as distinct from Retiisa. This last name seems to liave been 

 mucli misunderstood. In the British List (Journ. Conch., vol. x, 

 p. 23, January, 1901) Tornatina was used, one of the species being 

 obtusa, Montajiu. Retma is not mentioned. Hedley recently (Proc. 

 Linn. Soc. N.S.W., vol. xxxviii, p. 337, November, 1913) \\?,&d Itetusa 

 for two species, one of which is a typical Tornatina, the other one is 

 not. I cannot conclude whether he has recognized the true Retusa 

 or not, but it seems that he may have. Toniatina was proposed 

 by A. Adams in Sowerby's Thes. Conch., vol. ii, pt. xi, 1850, p. 554 ; 

 the animal was figured on pi. cxix, fig. 3, but no name given to the 

 species ; tlie shells were figured on pi. cxxi, figs. 24-39, the species 

 named being valuta, etc. Utriculus was recognized, and obtusa, 

 ^lontagu, placed thei'ein, but the animal was not figured. In 

 H. & A. Adams, Gen. llec. Moll., vol. ii, pp. 11, 12, September, 

 1854, we get the following information : " Utriculus, Erown. Syn., 

 Hetusa, Urowt^. Ex. W. obtusus, Tnvton. The genus is distinguished 

 from Tornatina in the suture of the spire not being channelled, and in 

 the simple inner lip. Ihmatina, A. Adams. Ex. sliell, T. valuta, Qi. &G. 

 This genus is composed of a group of small shells characterized by 

 their elevated spire, channelled suture, and plicate columella." Eischer 

 (Man. de Conch., p. 555, 1883, December 20) recognized that Tornatina, 

 indicating Utriculus, Brown, was invalid, owing to its prior proposal 

 by Schumacher, and then admitting it as a sub-genus, accepting 

 A. Adams' differential characters. He added Coleophysis for trunca- 

 tulus, Bruguiere, but this does not seem generically separable. The 

 following year Monterosato (Nomen gen. e spec. Concli. Medit., 

 1884, p. 143) proposed Cylichnina for the group above umhilicata, 

 Montagu, and this seems a very distinct group from Tornatina 

 = Retusa, Brown, 1827. Retusa was introduced by T. Brown in the 

 Illus. Conch. Gt. Brit. & Ire., 1827, pi. xxxviii, where three species 

 were figured, and named plicata, discors, and obtusa. These ai'e all 

 variations of obtusa, Montagu, and this species becomes, by monotypy, 

 the type of Retusa. I am at present unable to separate so-called 

 Tornati7ia from this species, the characters given by A. Adams being 

 comparatively valueless. Consequently I would suppress tiie latter 

 name, replacing it by Retusa. The correct name for the type does 

 not appear to have been yet determined. 



^fontagu, when he introduced his Bulla obtusa, recorded as 

 synonyms: '■'• B.\regulhiensis, Turt. Lin., v, p. 351. Adams, Micro., 

 t. 14, fig. 28." Upon comparison I rejected this determination, the 

 figure quoted seeming indeterminable. Montagu later, in tiie SuppL, 

 1808, p. 101, noted tliat Walker erroneously sent liim Bulla obtusa 

 under the name of Valuta alba. Referring to Walker I found a good 

 figure there given, and can only conclude Montagu has confused the 

 two names regulbiensis and alba. For, wliile the former, which 

 .Montagu recorded as his obtusa, is not that species, the latter, which 

 Montagu denied, is undoubtedly this shell. I am not alone in 

 this identification, as Forbes & Hanley, without doubt, quote 



