OF SOUTHERN INDIA. 44:7 
The corrections and additions which I am now about to record refer principally to the first 
four fasciculi published last year. 
Order. PULMONATA. 
Family, HELICID 4. 
For Anchistoma on pp: 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, ete., read Angystoma, as first used by 
Klein in his Tent. Meth. Ostr., 1753, p. 10. 
Order. PROSOBRANCHIA. 
For CreNoBRANCHIA, ASPIDOBRANCHIA, CYCLOBRANCHIA, etc., on p- 18 and 
the following pages, read CriNOBRANCHIATA, ASPIDOBRANCHIATA, CYCLOBRAN- 
CHIATA, ete. 
I. Family,—ALATA. 
On p. 23, for Aporrhais, da Costa, 1778, read “ Aporrhais, Petiver, 1711.” 
Aldrovandus is generally quoted as the authority for the name Aporrhais, but this 
is, in the sense in which the genus is at present adopted, not correct, unless we 
would agree to imply by the name of the author simply that Aldrovandus used the 
name Aporrhais for a shell of the Azara, but in such a case, I should think, 
Aristoteles would be the oldest authority. 
Aldrovandus (apparently following Aristoteles) used the name <Aporrhais 
for Pteroceras lambis (see, de reliquis animalibus exanguibus, etc., Bonn, 1642, 
pp. 341-344).” In the same work on pp. 357 and 358 Aldrovandus gives several 
figures of the Mediterranean Ap. pes-pelicani, Linn., calling the same a variety 
of Turbo, but at the same time stating that Plinius named it Pentedactylos. 
Consequently Aldrovandus cannot be accepted as the authority for the genus 
Aporrhais, as at present used in the literature of Conchology. There can be no 
question that all the names used by Aldrovandus are applied in a very vague 
sense, and can hardly have any influence upon the present system of nomenclature; 
for his names were, strictly speaking, not generic and specific. At the same time 
I believe there can be no objection to use those loose names of old authors in an 
emended way. 
Klein used the name Aporrhais in a proper generic sense, but it is hardly possible 
to decipher its meaning. The specimen figured by him may be an imperfect Strombus 
gallinula, though he says the name refers to a “ Voluta conica, ore longo ad tur- 
binem sinuato” (see Ten. Meth. Ostr., 1753, p. 79). Da Costa in his “ Elements of 
Conchology,” 1776, p. 282, pl. I, fig. 6, uses the name Aporrhais again for Pteroceras 
lambis, also in exactly the same sense as does Aldrovandus. VPetiver remains the 
only old authority for the name Aporrhais. Iam unable to refer to Petiver’s original 
publication of the name to determine whether he applies it to Ap. pes-pelicani, 
but Dillwyn (Phil. Trans., 1823, p. 3896) states distinctly that Petiver’s name ought 
