EUPLECTA. 67 



D. Conoidly depressed and carinate. 



101. Eaplecta acuducta, Bs. (Helix) A. M. N. H. (2) v, 1850, 

 p. 214 ; Pfr. (Helix) Mon. Hel. iii. 1853. p. 78 ; id. t. c. iv, 

 1859, p. 67 ; ? H. $ T. (Helix) C. I. 1876, pi. 50, fig. 5. 



Nanina koondaensis, Blf. J. A. S. B. 1870, p. 16, pi. 3, fig. 12 ; 

 H. $ T. (Helix) C. L 1876, pi. 56, figs. 5, 6; Pfr. Helix 

 (Nanina) Mon. Hel vii, 1876, p. 225 ; Nevill (Nanina), Hand-l. i, 

 1878, p. 29. 



Nanina subkoondaensis, Godwin- Austen (Nevill MS'.), Proc. Mai. 

 Soc. ii, 1897, p. 175 (no description). 



Shell perforate, sublenticular to depressed, carinate, fulvous 

 horny, finely striated above and decussated by rather close spiral 

 impressed lines, similarly marked, but smoother, below ; spire very 

 low, conoidal, suture very slightly impressed; whorls 5 1, almost 



Fig. 36. Euplecta acuducta. 



flat above, regularly increasing, the last sharply keeled, compressed 

 beneath the keel, swollen below ; aperture oblique, angularly 

 lunate ; peristome slightly obtuse, white inside, columellar margin 

 curved, slightly reflected above. 



Major diam. 25, min. 21, axis 11 mm. 



Hob. Nilgiris (Jerdon) ; Sispara Ghat, Kundah Hills (W. 

 T. B.) ; Tinnevelly ; Trevandrum (Theobald) ; Kadur district, 

 Mysore (Daly} ; Ceylon (G. Nevill, H. F. B.). 



The type of E. acuducta, now in Cambridge, is immature ; it 

 only differs from E. koondaensis in having rather flatter whorls and 

 a sharper keel (both characters due partly to immaturity) and in 

 having the last whorl slightly broader. 



The shell from the Kadur district of Mysore is sharply keeled 

 and subcostulately striated. 



This species varies in height of spire, sharpness of keel, and 

 sculpture, and some varieties approach E. indica, others E. travan- 

 corica. E. acuducta can be easily distinguished, as a rule, by the 

 height of the spire being much less than the depth of the last 

 whorl below the keel. 



The animal figured under the present name J. A. S. B. 1882, 2, 

 p. 69, pi. 5. fig. 2, is probably, as is pointed out by Grodwin-Austen 

 (L c.), wrongly identified. 



