loS SVKES : MAI.OCOLOGICAL NOTES. 



placed Aperoslonia as a subgenus of Cijr/otu-'< for many species including 

 inca and adopt Cijrtotoma. 



To complete the history of Cijii(jf(j)iia, I may remark that Martens 

 in 1865 formed a new species from some of the shells previously placed 

 under Cijrt. mcxicanum, and later on Crosse and Fischer proposed 

 Hahropoma for C. viexlrarmm (smsu sfrido). The two forms are by 

 no means easy to separate specifically and I think that they are 

 identical generically, and that therefore Hahropoma is unnecessary. 



Returning to Aperostoma, we' find Crosse and Fischer (Moll. 

 Mexique, Tom. ii, p. 149) stated that the genus was "incertain et mal 

 fixe,'" and they proposed Neocyclotus, which, if we regard hianrht'tiamnii 

 { = inca) as the type of Ajyerosforna, appears to be unnecessary. Acting 

 on the principle that it is wise to save these old generic names 

 where possible, I propose to retain it and to place Neocijdofus in the 

 syn(jnym)-. 



Such criticism as Crosse and Fischer applied to Aperosfoma might 

 equally be apj)lied to all the Linnean genera which included species 

 now scattered over other groups : some day, even, it might be utilised 

 in considering IVeoci/rlr/fus, in case that group be further subdivided. 



Dr. von Martens (Hiol. Centrali-Amer., p. 3) placed Aperostoma — 

 regarding Neorydotas as a synonym — as a section of Cijdoia^; it appeans, 

 however, to be quite distinct from that genus. 



10. Note on Voluta beauii, Fisch. and Bernardi. 



(Pi. X. fig. 5.) 



This handsome species was described "^ from Marie Galante. The 

 autliors state that only two specimens were known, and it still remains 

 scarce in collections. A slightly smaller specimen has been figured 

 by Sowerby. - 



Having recently come into possession of a fine specimen, slightly 

 larger thnn the original dimensions given, I take this opportunity of 

 figuring it (PI. x, fig. 5). It is slightly more attenuate thnn that 

 figured in the "Journal," and the outer lip is not so much "shouldered" 

 above, neither is it so effuse at the base. The ground-colour is also 

 more fiesh-coloured. The longitudinal ribs appear to be more obso- 

 lete than in cither of the figures, and not so closely set as in the shell 

 figured by Mr. Sowerby. Further there are, just inside the (juter lip, 

 a number of rather obsolete denticles. The protoccnch appears to 

 be of the usual form found in the />//;-/a-groui). 



1. Journ. de Conchyl., 1856 [Jaiiy. 1857], 'i^>'ii v, p. 296. Refeitiicc to plate should be i.\ 

 not X. 



2. 'J'hes. Concli., vol. v, pi. Dxvi, fig. 161. 



