FAMILY ZONITIU^E 4! 



Arnouldia fulva BOURGUIGNAT, Bull. Soc. Mai. de France., vn, p. 328, 1890. 

 Vitrea (Conulus) fulva E. A. SMITH, Journ. Conch. (Leeds), vi, No. x, p. 339, 



1891. 



Euconulus fulvus WOODWARD, Brit. Nonmarine Moll., p. 353, 1903. 

 Helix egena SAY, Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., v, p. 120, 1825. 

 Hyalina (Conulus) fulva BINNEY, Land and Freshw. Sh. of N. Am. part I, p. 



46, fig. 73, 1869. 

 Hyalinia (Conulus) trochifonnis (MONTAGU) WESTERLUND, Nachr. Mai. Ges., 



xv, p. 173, Dec., 1883. 

 Trochulus trochifonnis WESTERLUND, Fauna Pal. Reg., in 18 beilage, p. 16, 



1886. 

 Conuhis chersinus MORSE, Journ. Portland Soc. N. Hist., I, p. 19, figs. 44, 



46, pi. II, fig. 4, pi. vii, fig. 45, 1864, not Helix chersina Say, 1821. 

 Conulus fulvus (MULLER), and var. alaskensis PILSBRY, Nautilus, XII, No. 



10, pp. 115-6, 1899. 

 Euconulus fulvus PILSBRY, Nautilus, xiv, Nov., 1900, p. 81. 



Variety fabricii (Beck). 



Helix nitida FABRICIUS, Fauna Gronl., p. 389, 1780, not of Miiller. 

 Helix (Petasid) fabricii BECK, Index, p. 21, 1837, nude name. MOLLER, 

 Index Moll. Groenl., p. 7, 1842. 



Range. Holarctic, and widely distributed south- 

 ward. 



Canada ; Manitoba at Carberry, Pine Creek, Pem- 

 bina, and Lake of the Woods ; in Alberta at Laggan, 

 Red Deer, Olds and McLeod ; English River, Kee- 

 watin; California! Oregon! Washington! Victoria, f orm ^ ( maen i_ 

 Vancouver Island ! Sitka, Alaska ; Unalaska ! Bering fied x 

 Island, Bering Sea ! Petropavlovsk, Kamchatka ! 

 Pooten, Konyam and St. Lawrence Bays, eastern Siberia. 



Variety fabricii Moller. Greenland ! Ungava ! 

 Labrador. 



Variety alaskensis Pilsbry. Yukon drainage, Lake 



FIG. 29. Eu- Lindeman to Point Romanof and St. Michael, 

 conulus trocki- Alaska ; Dyea valley, Southeastern Alaska ! 

 formis var. fa- This f am iii ar ii tt i e s h e ll has had various vicissitudes 

 in nomenclature. The name fulva Miiller, by which 

 it is best known, was based, according to Beck, who 

 was custodian of Muller's types, upon Helix bidentata Gmelin, while 

 a shell which Miiller supposed to be the young, but did not figure 

 or fully describe, was supposed by some of the early naturalists to be 

 our species. Another unfigured species, Helix trochulus Miiller, was 

 thought by Dillwyn to be identical with our fulva, but the measure- 

 ments forbid the identification, and Pfeiffer came to the conclusion 

 that H. trochulus is identical with the young tip of Buliminus ob- 

 scurus. Fabricius supposed our shell to be identical with Helix 



