222 ACANTHOPLEURA. 



C. spiniger SOWB., Mag. of Nat. Hist. 1840, p. 287, Suppl. pl.xvi, 

 f. 2 ; P. Z. S. 1841, p. 61 ; Conch. Illustr., f. 68. REEVE, Conch. 

 Icon., t. 14, f. 75. Maugeria spinigera GRAY, Guide Moll. B. M., 

 p. 184 (1857). Acanthopleura spinigera CPR., MS. and DALL, Proc. 

 U. S. Nat. Mus. 1882, p. 80. Chiton (Acanthopleura') spiniger 

 SMITH, Zool. Coll. H. M. S. ' Alert,' p. 81 (1884) ; P. Z. S. 189J, p. 

 420. Acanthopleura spiniger HADDON, Challenger Polyplac., p. 

 23. Acanthopleura balansce ROCHEBR. Bull. Soc. Philomath. Paris, 

 1881-2, p. 197. 



?? Maugeria owenii GRAY, Guide Moll. B. M., p. 184 (no descrip- 

 tion or figure). ? ? Chiton gemmatus BLAINV., Diet. Sc. Nat. xxxvi, 

 p. 544. 



It is now impossible to prove that this is, or is not, the Chiton 

 aculeatus of Linne ; but any one who will consult the original 

 description, " C. testa octovalvi ztriata, corpore subaculeato" then turn 

 to Rumphius' figure cited as an illustration, will be prepared to 

 acquiesce in Hanley's suggestion (Ipsa Linn. Conch.) that the 

 species be dropped as unidentifiable. Gmelin had no better informa- 

 tion upon this species than we ; and therefore his additional citations 

 of figures are valueless. The mere fact that the figure cited by 

 Linne represents an oriental species is offset by the absolute impos- 

 sibility of knowing that it was an Acanthopleura. 



Besides the localities given above, this species has been reported 

 from Suez by Issel (Mai. Mar Rosso p. 235, and see also Cooke, 

 Ann. Mag. N. H. 1885, p. 276), from Aden by Haddon (Challenger 

 Polyplac., p. 24). It has been figured from the Red Sea by Savigny 

 (see pi. 3, figs. 4, 1-2 of his folio). Probably Savigny's figs. 7, 1-3 

 of the same plate represent a young shell of the same, although I 

 have seen none closely corresponding in sculpture. The eyes are 

 distinctly drawn by the artist, a rather remarkable circumstance 

 when we remember that no subsequent illustrations of Chitons show 

 them ! Additional localities are New Zealand reported by Q. & G. 

 and Hakodadi, Japan by Schrenck (Amurl. Moll. p. 275) ; but 

 these two localities must be regarded as doubtful until confirmed by 

 either fresh specimens or a critical re-examination of the specimens 

 and data in each case. 



The study of the Indo-Pacific Acanthopleuras may be somewhat 

 simplified by the elimination of (1) A. borbonica, characterized by a 

 bifissate tail-valve (pi. 45, fig. 77) and (2) the " Acanthopleura " 



