OP SOUTHEEN INDIA. 161 



32. — V. sub-rofimda, d^Orb.j (rotundata, Sow.,) is a Garijaiis. 



33-34. — F. mtnersa tind siiileevis ot Sowerby both are probably Gijiliereo! ; the former could 

 also be an oval Cyprlmer'ia. 



35-36. — V. sub-truncata, d'Orb., (truncata, Sow.), and V. submersa, Sow., belong to Canjails. 



37. — Y. ...^Teniis faba, Sow., apud d'Orb. This may be identical with our Indian Cytlterea 

 [Callisia] fabulina (see p. 174). 



38. — V. Cemmanensis, d'Orb., is Baroda fragilis, (d'Orb.), belonging to the sub-family 

 TAPESIN^, and described by Zittel as Tapes fragilis, d'Orb., sp., from tlie Gosau (vide Denksch. 

 Akad., Wien, 1865, vol. xxiv, pt. ii, p. 122, pi. iii, fig. 3). 



39. — V. Roiomagensis, d'Orb., apparently a Cari/atis. 



40. — V. Astieriana, Math., most likely a true Ci/tlierea. 



41. — v. Labadyei, d'Arch., a ? Caryafis, or Cyprimeria. 



42. — V. Renauxiana, d'Orb., was proposed for the form referred in the Pal. fran5. to T. plana, 

 Sow., and is said to differ in being much more compressed than this. No reference is made to the 

 figures, or any special description, and no opinion can, therefore, be pronounced without the originals. 



43. — V. Noneliana, d'Orb., is said to be allied, but more tumid than Cyth. plana. 



44. — V. Martiniana, Math., is a Paratapes of the TAPESLV^k, and ought to stand as Para/apes 

 lavigata, Sedg. and Murch. (see Zittel in Denksch. Akad., Wien, xxiv, pt. ii, p. 12:i). 



45. — V. sub-lenticular is, Haime, is evidently a Cyprimeria, in which the middle tooth of the 

 right valve is bifid, imless it is a slight deficiency of the drawing. 



46.— r. cuneiformis, Duj. The impressions on the cast, as seen in the figure 5«, appear to 

 be those of a Cyprimeria ; it is a somewhat oval form. 



47. — V. jucunda, Duj. This is one of the very few cretaceous forms I know, the ornamenta- 

 tion and solid shell of which closely resemlde Venus proper, but the specimen is so imperfect 

 as not to allow of a correct determination of the genus ; it could with almost equal probability 

 belong to Linearia of the TELLINID^E. 



48. — V. sub -plana, d'Orl>., is said to be again different from the F. jt;fo«« in the Pal. fran9., 

 vol. iii, pi. 386, figs. 1-3 (vide p. 160 and p. 169). 



49. — F. Royana, d'Orb., probably a Baroda, or another genus of the Tafesin.e. Schaf hajutl 

 (Siid-Bayerns Leth. Geog., 1863, p. 171, pi. xxxviii, fig. 3,) figures under this name a shell 

 which I hardly believe could belong to this species, but much more ]n-ol)ably to the MyW2E. The 

 ideas indicated of the conchological value of a species are quite as singular as those of geological 

 formations ! 



50. — F. Arc/tiaciana, d'Orb., is most likely an elongated Cyprimeria. 



51. — V. Lamarchi, Math., may either be an Eripliyla or an Aslarte. 



52. — F. late-sulcafa, Math., !" a Callista. 



53. — F. ovum. Math., mostly resembles such recent forms as Tapes meroeformis, Sow., 

 which belongs to a special section of Pallastra. 



54. — F. turgida, Math., (subturgida oy pseudotiirgida, d'Orb.,) is most likely a Caryatis. 



55. — F. Lapeyronsana, Lcym. 



56. — Artemis elegantula, Sharjie, is most probably a Cyprimeria. 



Pietet and Campiche have, I believe, very good reason to hesitate in giving a list of the Ger- 

 man and Bohcemiau and other cretaceous species, on the ground that the identification of these with 

 foreign species may not be correct. I have myself seen a good many of them ; but unless one under- 

 takes the difficult task of searching after the originals and is successful in this, nothing positive 

 can be said regarding the correctness of these determinations, or otherwise. 



57. — F. sub-ovalis, I'Orb., (F. ovalis, Goldf., Nucula concentrica, Gein.,) must stand as 

 Cyikerea \_Cari/atis\ ovalis, Goldf., sp. I have examined very good specimens of botli valves received 



2 11 



