288 CRETACEOUS GASTROPODA 
4. Euchrysalis, Laube, 1866 (Sitzungsb. Akad., Wien, Vol. LIII, Fauna 
der St. Cassian Schichten, etc., p. 5). I merely quote the name of this genus 
from an abstract of the paper, as the memoirs, containing the detailed descriptions of 
the species, have not yet reached Calcutta. The reference, however, to a few well 
known species, formerly described by Minster and Klipstein from the triassic beds 
of St. Cassian, shows that the peculiarities of these shells deserve a generic distinc- 
tion. They differ from Leiostraca by a pupoid form, being attenuated towards each 
end and thickened in the middle; the last volution is large, but posteriorly much 
contracted, and the aperture is proportionately very small. The surface is generally 
smooth ; the inner lip somewhat thickened and arcuate, the outer lip sharp, sinuous 
and not thickened externally. The genus evidently recalls Fenella of the Rrssorpa, 
including shells of a similar form, but provided with sharp, transverse and spiral 
ribbings. The thickened inner lip also recalls the form of Bacula, Adams. 
From the jurassic strata species, like Rissow levis (Rissoina id, d’Orb., et auct.), 
Phasianella acutiuscula, Morris and Lycett, and others, may belong to this genus. 
Besides the two species, Hulima amphora, d’Orb., and Chem. bisulcata, VOrb., we 
are not acquainted with any other cretaceous forms, except one from our South 
Indian deposits, and this one only differs from the typical triassic and jurassic 
species by its gigantic dimensions. We shall describe this species under the name 
of Huch. gigantea. There are several tertiary species known, which in general 
form very much resemble Huchrysalis, and of living species I may mention the 
Eulima obesula, Ad., to which I have drawn attention, when speaking of Keilo- 
stoma (see p. 280). 
5. Putilla, Adams, 1867 (Proc. Zool. Soc., p. 312); shell turbinate, solid, 
pellucid ; aperture sub-quadrate, anteriorly sub-effuse, inner lip straight, thickened ; 
columella rimate. 
(?) 6. Miso, Risso, 1826 (H. and A. Adams, Gen. I, p. 287). I do not know 
whether the animal of Miso has as yet been observed, but judging from the 
angular shape of the whorls and the anteriorly produced aperture, it seems to 
me, that these umbilicated shells will be better classed in a distinct sub-family in 
the PrrauipELLip#, as stated previously on p. 181. A comparison of the animals 
is, however, necessary before this transfer can be made. 
(?)6a. Volusia, A. Adams, 1861 (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Vol. VIII, p. 306,) 
has been proposed as a sub-genus of the former, and is based on Miso imbricata, 
Sow., which has the whorls transversally ribbed. 
(?) 66. Tole, A. Adams, 1860 (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., V, p. 300,) resembles 
Niso in form, but has a remarkably thin shell, because it lives in deep-water; the 
surface is spirally sulcated. 
It is likely that some jurassic species, which have also a very thin shell, 
like Trochus Cupido, d’Orb. (Pal. Frang. Terr. Jur., IT, pl. 809, and Sitzungsb. Akad., 
Wien, 1861, Vol. XLIII, p. 174); Miso Nerea, Deslongchamps, (Bull. Soc. Linn. 
Norm., 1860, Vol. V, p. 126), and a few others, may be referrible to this or to the 
former sub-genus. The only cretaceous species of Niso is described from California 
by Gabb as WV. polita (Paleeon. of Calif. 1864, I, p. 116, pl. 21, fig. 113). 
