ODONTOSTOMUS. 69 



437 ; vi, 76 ; vfii, 609 ; Conchyl. Cab. p. 140, pi. 45, f. 1, 2. REEVE, 

 Conch. Icon. pi. 38, f. 232. Odontostomus wagneri Pfr. var. para- 

 guayana ANCEY, Journal of Conchology vii, p. 93 (July, 1892). 



This slender, turreted, gradually-tapering species is apparently 

 rather widely distributed in the interior of S. Paulo, Paraguay, Bo- 

 livia and Argentina. Pfeiffer attempted to distinguish his B. wagneri 

 from Spix's species, but there is no such distinction as he indicates 

 to be drawn in the series of specimens before me. The earliest name 

 for this species is Pupa striata Wagner, pre-occupied in Pupa. This 

 precedes the name Clausilia striata Spix, in the same volume. The 

 next name is Helix spixii of Orbigny, bastid solely upon CL striata 

 Spix, in the original publication of 1835. Subsequent information 

 shows that the renowned South American explorer had two varietal 

 forms before him, to both of which he applied varietal names at the 

 time he. proposed the name spixii, defining them afterwards. 



Pfeiffer originally proposed the name B. wagneri for Pupa striata 

 Wagner, without description, but referring to Deshayes' description 

 (An. s. Vert, viii, 186), which applies to a practically typical speci- 

 men 32 mill, long, 10 wide. He afterwards attempted to define 

 wagneri as distinct from striata. 



Von Martens (1894) proposes to admit four varieties: (a) bohlsi, 

 (b) paraguayanus, (c) spixi, and (d) wagneri. I have already shown 

 that the latter two names were originally applied to typical striatus 

 Spix, and are not available for varieties. It is somewhat remarkable 

 that in some localities two or more of the varietal forms occur, ap- 

 parently without intergradation. Thus, in the specimens taken by Dr. 

 Bohls at Barranca de la Novia, Uruguay, von Martens recognizes 

 the above four forms, all sent as from the one locality, but both adult 

 and most of the >oung specimens separable at a glance into the four 

 groups. It is quite likely, however, that they were collected in dif- 

 ferent places, perhaps a few miles apart, in the course of naturalizing 

 excursions in the vicinity of the town, and the difference may be thus 

 explicable as the immediate reaction of varying local conditions of 

 moisture and food. The specimens show no noticeable variation in 

 sculpture, which consists of weak vertical strire, becoming stronger 

 on the middle whorls than on those above and below. There is some 

 variation in the teeth, which, however, is not correlated with form 

 and size variation. Thus a few specimens show a small suprapalatal 

 fold [such as occurs in var. minor Orb.]. This is seen in 2 out of 6 



