A FEW NOTES FROM THE ANTIPODES. 



By HENKY SUTER. 



(i.) It is not very long since I acquired Bruno Beutler's " Die Anatomic 

 von Panijihanta hodistetteri., Pfr.," shortly reviewed in this Journal (vol 

 viii, T901, p. 125). Though over five years have passed since its pub- 

 lication, yet I beg to be allowed to make a few remarks which may 

 prove of general interest. 



The author mentions that Prof. Spengel helped him considerably to 

 procure the necessary literature, but on examining the long list, four 

 pages, we find that no mention is made of Lieut.-Colonel Godwin- 

 Austen's paper on the anatomy of Panjphanta liochatetteri (Proc. Mai. 

 Soc, vol. i, page 5), though it was published as far back as 1893, whilst 

 Beutler's paper was issued the 24 April, 1901 ! Such an omission 

 is hardly excusable ; does the University of Giessen not keep the 

 " Zoological Record " ? There is also no mention made of Mr. Walter E. 

 CoUinge's paper " On the Anatomy of certain Agnathous Pulmonate 

 MoUusks " (Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (7), vol. viii.) which appeared in 

 January, 1901, nor of my short papers puplished in 1899. Like 

 Godwin-Austen, Beutler seems to have oveilooked the interesting fact, 

 demonstrated by CoUinge, that the vas deferens, joining the penis very low 

 down, continues, hidden by tissue, to the distal end. However, there 

 arises the question whether this peculiarity is a constant feature, as Beutler 

 gives a figure of a cross-section of the penis (fig. 49) which does not show 

 the vas deferens, but it is not stated from which part this section was 

 obtained. 



The formula of the teeth of the odontophore was found by Godwin- 

 Austen to be 67 — I — 67, by Beutler 59 — 1 — 59. the difference l)eing periiaps 

 due to different ages of the animals examined The high papillae on the 

 interior wall of the penis, recorded by Beutler, seem to have escaped 

 Godwin- Austin's notice. 



The specimens examined by Beutler belonged to the dark brown 

 variety Of P. hochstetteri, as it occurs in the Takaka Valley and in the 

 Manawatu district, and it seems to have been overlooked by many 

 systematists that he bestowed the name ohscura on this variety. 



(2) When dealing with " Clessin's new Species of Sea/aria from 

 New Zealand" in this Journal, 1899 (vol. vii, pag. 5J), I stated that 

 S. zelehori was first described by Frauenfield in " Reise der Novara, 

 Zool., 1868." This however is not correct, as I found out lately after 

 the acquisition of a reprint of "Bericht iiberdie von der Novara — Expedition 

 mitgebrachten Mollusken, von Dr. Dunker and Joh. Zelebcjr," which 

 appeared in " Verliandl. Zool. Bot. Gesell. Wien, 1866, vc;!. xvi "' 

 There, on page 912, is to be found the diagnosis of Sralaria zelehori, 

 Dunker. The latter is therefore the real author of the species, and the 

 date of publication 1866. Why Frauenfield put /i/.s name after the species 

 in the Novara work I cannot tell. 



