55 



55 

 55 

 55 

 55 

 55 

 55 



55 

 55 

 55 



MADEIRAN GROUP. 115 



blished. Perhaps future researches in Porto Santo, or on the 

 immediately adjacent islets, will reveal some local modification 

 of the caperata, in which this slightly increased bulk of the 

 basal whorl may constitute more or less a distinctive feature. 1 



Helix armillata. 



Helix 'striata, Drap. ?' Lowe, Cambr. Phil. 8. Trans, iv. 



53(1831) 

 Lowei, Pot. et Mich, [nee Fer., 1835], Gal. des 

 Moll. 91 (1838) 

 „ Pfeiff., Mon. Hel. i. 149 (1848) 

 armillata, Lowe, Ann. Nat. Hist. 113 (1852) 

 „ Pfeiff., Mon. Hel. iii. 116 (1853) 

 „ Lowe, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 170 (1854) 

 „ Alb., Mai. Mad. 20. t. 2. f. 32-35 (1854) 

 eumasus, Lowe, Proc. Linn. Soc. Lond.; Zool. 198 



(1860) 

 armillata, Paiva, Mon. Moll. Mad. 68 (1867) 

 „ Morelet, Journ. de Conch. 236 (1873) 

 „ Watson, Journ. de Conch. 222 (1876) 



Habitat Maderam ; in aridis apricis inferioribus juxta Fun- 

 chal, hinc inde vulgaris. 



I am extremely doubtful whether the present rather in- 

 significant little Helix is more in reality than a small and 

 perhaps slightly modified phasis of the common H. caperata, 

 Mont. (= striata, Drap.), which is so widely spread throughout 

 the maritime regions of central and southern Europe ; and so 

 indeed it was at first registered, although in doubt, by Mr. 

 Lowe. Subsequently however he described it under the name 

 armillata''; adding i H. striata}, Drap., arums.' 



I cannot however feel satisfied (and Mr. Watson, judging 

 from his remarks, would appear to be of the same opinion) 

 that it merits separation from the depauperated state of that 

 species, — which is extremely common about Lisbon and Cintra, 

 and which in fact is generally to be met with wherever the 



1 With regard to Mr. Lowe's after-rejection of the H. lauta from the Ma- 

 deiran list, I would refer to his observations at p. viii of the Appendix to the 

 reprint (in 1851, by Mr. Van Voorst) of his original papers ' Prhnitias et 

 Novitiae Fauna? et Flora Madera? et Portus Sancti,' which were contained in 

 the fourth volume of the ' Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical 

 Society.' I cannot but think however that he was mistaken in supposing 

 that the H. lauta is more akin to the v'mjata, Mont., than it is to the caperata ; 

 and I also fail to perceive that its umbilicus is very decidedly ' smaller ' than 

 that of the latter, — thoiigh it is certainly a little smaller, as well as jusl 

 appreciably more closed-over by the lamellated portion of the peristome 

 which adjoins the columella. 



i 2 



i 



