176 Miscellanies. 
34. U. corrugata, Lam. Undoubtedly distinct. 
Possibly the young Alasmodonta 
35. U. nodulosa, Lam. tee 2 of Say. 
36. U. varicosa, Lam. Resembles the 4. undulata, Say. 
37. U. granosa, Lam. —_A distinct species. 
38. U. depressa, Lam. a 0. 
39. U. virginiana, Lam radiatus of Barnes. 
40. U. luteola, Lam. A variety of Say’s cariosus. 
41. U. marginalis, Lam. Distinct. 
42. U. angusta, Lam. A variety of pictorum. 
It may be a distinct species, butre- 
#8. U- manca, Lam. ; sembles a variety of pictorum. 
44. U. cariosa, Lam. The cariosus of Say. 
. . : ie 
45. U. spuria, Lam. Doge be identified with any o 
SoU. australis, Toor Cannot be identified with any Amer- 
ican shell. 
t 
47. U. anodontina, Lam. ely the Anodonta undulata 
ay. 
48. U. suborbiculata, Lam. _ Cannot be identified. 
Mr. Lea concludes hisreview of Lamarck’s genus with the fol- 
lowing candid remarks respecting the reputation of that conchol- 
ogist. 
“In passing criticisms upon the species of the genus Unio, of this 
great naturalist, I do not in the least wish to detract from his great 
and merited fame. My object is expressly to endeavor to facilitate 
“the study of this interesting genus, and to remove as far as I have it 
in my power, the confusion which has creptinto it. My observations, 
I wish to pass only for what they may prove to be worth.” 
With respect to Mr. Lea’s observations on the structure and habits 
of the animals which construct these shells, we find his remarks upon 
the anatomy of the Unio irroratus (Lea,) the most deserving of at- 
tention. He has been the first observer of any anatomical differ- 
ence among the Naiades. The peculiarity relates to the form an 
position of the oviducts ; and is one which is obviously indispensable 
to suit the construction of the shell. It is an adaptation of the ut- 
most felicity ; and would seem to be the result only, of a most in- 
tricate geometrical calculation. : 
In relation to the food of the Naiades he remarks in his last paper 
as follows : 
