330 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



Scand., vol. i, pt. ii, table A, had proposed JVeomenius, with the same 

 derivation. I therefore propose to replace TuUberg's name as above. 

 The synonym Solenopus, Koren & Dauielssen. Archiv Math, and 

 Naturh. Kristiania, vol. ii, p. 127, 1877, is itself preoccupied by 

 Solenojms, Schoenherr (Isis, 1825, col. 584). 



Tectuea, Gray. 



Acmcea, Eschscholtz, has been preferred to Tectura, and I note that 

 this was long a source of discussion wliich was at last decided in 

 favour of Ac/ncsa on the score of priority. That there was a prior 

 Acmea seems to have been ignored by all the disputants, but such is 

 a fact, wliich was on record all the time. Acmea is a valid molluscan 

 name, and I think it quite impossible to maintain as well, in practical 

 usage, Acmcea. I think, moreover, that the type of Acmcea cannot be 

 regarded as congeneric with the British shells so named. For them 

 we can then revert to Tectura, lirst introduced in a Latin guise 

 by Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc, 1847, p. 158, the type by original 

 designation being Patella parva, which is regarded as a synonym of 

 P. rirgiiiea, 0. F. Miiller (Zool. Dan. Prodr., p. 237, 1776, Danmark). 

 ' Tecture ' had only previously appeared as a French vernacular, as 

 admitted by all writers. 



AVhen Dall reviewed the Acraseidse he proposed Collisella (Amer. 

 Journ. Conch., vol. vi, p. 245, April 4, 1871) as a sub-genus of 

 Acmcea, designating as type A. pelta, Eschscholtz. To that sub-genus 

 he referred Patella testudinalis, 0. F. Miiller (Zool. Dan. Prodr., 

 1776, p. 237, Daumark). As a synonym of this name has been 

 generally quoted Patella tesselata, O. F. Miiller. That name first 

 appeared on the same page as testtidinalis, but placed before it, and 

 has therefore place priority ; it is there spelt tessulafa. In the Zool. 

 Dan. later, 0. F. Miiller gave long detailed descriptions of the new 

 species diagnosed in two lines in the Prodromus above cited. In 

 vol. i, p. 27, 1779, a full detailed account of Patella tesselata is given, 

 but there is no further mention of P. testudinalis. This is, to me, 

 suggestive, as there was a prior P. testudinaria, Linne, Syst. Nat., 

 10th ed., 1758, p. 783, and I would conclude that Miiller's tessulata 

 or tesselata has the best claim to usage. 



Ansates, Sowerby, 1839. 



In the List Patina, Leach, is used. I hope such a quotation will 

 surely never be given again by a worker who has to trace names, 

 and my usage is the rejection of all Leachian names until it be proved 

 that Leach published them. The earliest usage of Patina I have yet 

 traced is that by Gray, when he published the Leachian names in the 

 Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., vol. xx, p. 271, October, 1847. His type was 

 by monotypy P. Icecis. However, in the Conchological Manual, 

 1st ed., 1839, by Sowerby, I came across the following entry : 

 "p. 6, Ansates, Klein. Species of Patella with a produced recurved 

 beak. Helcion, Monti. Ex. Patella pelJucida, fig. 230." From this, 

 the only conclusion possible is the recognition of Ansates, Sowerby 



