THE NAUTILUS. 141 



(A conclusion made doubly certain when we know that even 

 Dr. Lea thought that the " Lampsilis fasciola, Rafinesque" 

 might be the species which he (Lea) had afterwards named 

 " Unio multiradiatus.") 



It is true that the name "Unio fasciata, Rafinesque," was 

 given by Conrad to a rayed specimen of " Hgamentinus, 

 Lamarck" (Monography, Plate I, 1836), an error which may 

 yet quite often be found duplicated in cabinets. 



But this patent error of Conrad's scarcely militates against 

 the conclusions drawn, since we find in the same work (Mon- 

 ography) figured as one species, specimens of the very diverse 

 shells, Unio fisherianus, Lea, and Unio nasutus, Say (Plate 18). 



We find, too, that Conrad figured under the name of " Unio 

 glans, Lea," a specimen of the very different Unio perpur- 

 pureus. Lea (Monography, Plate 9), etc. 



As bearing upon Conrad's figure referred to, Dr. Lea cogently 

 remarks: "Mr. Conrad thinks the 'crassus. Say,' is the 'fasci- 

 ata ' of Rafinesque. An examination of his description ought 

 to satisfy any one that the ' crassus, Say ' could not have been 

 under the eye of the author when he made his description of 

 ' fasciata. ' ' ' 



As bearing upon the identification of "fasciata" with the 

 " pseudo-luteolus " — the "Unio siliquoideus, Barnes," it is a 

 matter of history that Rafinesque often sent to Ferussac speci- 

 mens of shells from the West, bearing names given by the 

 donor. 



Dr. Lea records the fact that specimens of the " siliquoideus, 

 Barnes" were seen by him in the cabinet of Ferussac in 1832, 

 labeled " Unio fasciata, Rafinesque." 



All of the available evidence therefore goes to show that the 

 name "fasciata, Rafinesque" must supplant as the specific 

 name of the species, the " luteolus, Lamarck," the latter being 

 a synonym of the early " Unio cariosus, Say." 



