INTRODIJCTION, IX 



the ' Eossilia Hantoniensia ' of 1700 have been recognized and adopted. 

 This stands as one of the few early works founded on the binomial system, 

 and is in complete accordance with all modern ideas of zoological nomen- 

 clature. As these changes are of considerable interest not only to the 

 Pateontologist but also to the student of Systematic Conchology, attention 

 will now be directed to them. 



Beginning with the Lamellibranch genera, we may notice, firstly, that 

 A.vinifa of Poli, 1795, is adopted for the better-known Fectunculus of 

 Lamarck, 1799 ; this change being first of aU suggested by Stoliczka *, 

 and has since received the concurrence of later authors. This is not 

 insisted upon merely on the grounds of priorit}', but because the generic 

 name of Ptctunmlus was indiscriminately applied by Martini, Da Costa, 

 and others to shells totally distinct from the restricted meaning attached 

 to it in 1799. Stoliczka was again the first authority to substitute 

 Ilindsiella for Deshayes's llinds'ia of 1858, a name which had been pre- 

 viously applied by A. Adams t in 1853 for another shell. This has been 

 noticed in the " Addenda," as well as the next genus under consideration, 

 viz. Lamarck's Cyprina of 1818 (erroneously quoted by some writers as 

 1812, at which time it was a mere list-name and of no value in nomen- 

 clature), Linnaeus's X preoccupation of which in 1766 for a Fish renders it 

 invalid. But, on the grounds of priority, it ought never to have been 

 retained by conchologists, as Schumacher in 1817 had already invested his 

 genus Arctica with precisely the same type as illustrated the Lamarckian 

 Cifprina. The revival of this name is therefore of value, more especially 

 as it has hitherto escaped the attention of systematists. 



Any alteration in the type genus of a family would of necessity cause 

 a change in that family name. Hence the introduction of Arctica will 

 negative the family name Cypriuida; in favour of Arcticida;. 



Lamarck's Meretriv of 1799 is adopted for a two-fold reason. It is 

 synonymous with his Cytherea of 1800, a name which, probably unknown 

 to its author, was applied by Fabricius § in 1805 to a Dipterous insect. 



Some authors have experienced a difficulty in deciding between the 

 merits of the two genera Fanopcea and Ghjcimeris, though it seems very 

 clear that they are one and the same shell. The former was founded by 

 Menard de la Groyo in 1807 for a Pliocene fossil from Northern Italy, and 

 named P. Faujasi, a second and a recent species being also included, 

 called F. Aldrovandi. There can be no doubt that these two species can 

 be properly included in Lamarck's Ghjcimeris of 1799, the type of which 



» " The Pelecjpoda," Mem. Geol. Surv. India, 1871, p. 334. 



t Proc. Zool. See. 1853, p. 182. 



t Systema Natura-, 1766, od. 12. vol. 1. p. 525. 



§ Systema Antliaturiirn, 1805, p. 116. 



