412 TEST ACE A ATLANTICA. 



island is altogether uncertain. Shuttleworth, who examined 

 and described them, states that the species is near to the Tene- 

 rififan H. phalerata, W. et B., but that it is more depressed, 

 and has its umbilicus more distinct and open; and thus far, 

 therefore, I might well have followed Mousson in identifying it 

 with the shell, from Grand Canary, which I have denned as a 

 'var. a. umbilicala" 1 of the H. persimilis. But since it is 

 further recorded as having a thickened rim-like callosity (as in 

 the H. monilifera) immediately within the aperture, and its 

 upper and lower lips connected by a white corneous lamina, it 

 seems quite impossible to identify it with any phasis of the 

 extremely variable (and very much smaller) H. persimilis. 

 Like so many of the species therefore in the Marseilles col- 

 lection, it must be left in doubt until its correct habitat has 

 been ascertained. 



Helix umbicula. 



Helix rosetti, Pfeiff. [nee W. et .], Mon. Hel. i. 156 (1848) 



[sec. ShuttlJ] 

 phalerata, Pfeiff. [nee W. et J5.], Mon. Hel. ii. 393 



(1848) [sec. Shuttl.} 



umbicula, Shuttl., Bern. Mitth. 290 (1852) 

 Mouss., Faun. Mai. des Can. 41 (1872) 



Pfeiff,, Mon. Hel. vii. 230 (1876) 



Habitat 'Canaries' (Mus. de Marseille, Coll. Terver), sec. 

 Shuttleworth. 



This is another of those Helices concerning the habitat of 

 which nothing positive is known, it having been established on 

 a single example which is said to exist in the Museum at Mar- 

 seilles. That example is from Terver's collection, and was 

 doubtless obtained, like so many of his shells, from bags of 

 orchil, even the exact country of which was frequently open 

 to considerable doubt; and it is much to be regretted that 

 species of such uncertain origin should ever have been admitted 

 at all into a fauna which professes to be accurate and precise. 

 Still it is far from unlikely that the H. umbicula may be, at 

 any rate, truly ' Canarian,' for it is stated by Shuttleworth to 

 be allied to the H. monilifera^ W. et B. Nevertheless, judging 

 from the diagnosis, it appears to be considerably larger than the 

 latter (its greatest diameter being 9 millimetres, instead of only 

 6 or 7 ), less solid in substance, and more distinctly perforated. 

 Like it, however, the interior of its peristome is calloso- 

 labiate. 1 



1 Considering that I have rejected from the Canarian catalogue the H. 

 mcvrcida and meloluntha, Shuttl., and the Pomatias Uarthelemianum, Shuttl. 

 (which exist only in the Marseilles Museum, and which would appear to 



