86 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



Again, on p. 100, under Oxychihis we see thespdcies usually referred 

 to the subgenus Polita (with the added blunder of referring Helix 

 nitida, Miiller, to both " 0. lucidus " and " 0. nitidulusYSiT.nitens ") 

 having appended to them " 0. ericetorwm " and its " var. cespitum ", 

 both for the well-known Miillerian species. It is clear these 

 were intended to form part of the following " Helicojjsis " with its 

 sole species " striata " and supposed synonyms inter secta and 

 fasciolata, Poiret, caperata, Mont. Unfortunately, the name Oxychilus 

 is rendered untenable by the earlier Oxycheila of Dejean, 1825, for 

 Coleoptera. 



The final slip is on p. Ill, where under Anisus, for Planorhis 

 complanatus, Drap., carinatus, MiilL, and marginatus, Drap., A. 

 - vortex, MtilL, is included, which could not have been intended to be 

 separated from the immediately following " Planorhis spirorhis, 

 Miiller ". Fitzinger probably borrowed his Anisus from Studer, 1820, 

 who employed it for Planorhis with Physa, whilst his name as 

 circumscribed is shut out by Dejean's use of it in 1821 for Coleoptera. 



The type of Ancylus, Geoffroy. 



It seems to have been generally overlooked that Geoffroy, when 

 he founded the genus Ancylus (Traite Coq. Paris, 1767, p. 122), 

 cited but one species, and that one (p. 124) the Patella lacustris of 

 Linne. We think we have established (Journ. Linn. Soc. (Zool.), 

 xxxiv, 1920, p. 210) that this .was the form which came into Beck's 

 group Acroloxus (= Velletia, Gray), consequently Acroloxus becomes 

 a synonym of Ancylus [s.s.]. 



The kindred British iormfluviatilis, MiilL, it is universally agreed, 

 must be placed in a distinct genus, since fiuong other difierences is 

 a sinistral animal, whereas lacustris is dentral, so that recourse must 

 be had to the subgeneric name of Ancylastrum, proposed by 

 Bourguignat in 1853 (Journ. de Conchyl., iv, p. 63), and that name 

 must now be raised to generic rank. 



Bourguignat's procedure in the same paper (p. 187) in replacing 

 Miiller's trivial name of fluviatilis by " simjolex, Buc'hoz ", cannot 

 be sustained. Buc'hoz was not a binominal author, and there is 

 nothing to show that his " Lepas simplex ", etc., was in any way 

 related to Miiller's mollusc. 



On BuLiNUS of Adanson. 



The recent tendency to revive Adanson's old name of Bulinus, 

 or, as amended by Oken, Bidlinus, especially in medical literature 

 dealing Avith Bilharzia, renders it desirable to once again point out 

 that the name is not available, and further that its use especially 

 in its present erroneous application to aquatic moUusca in widely 

 separate regions is misleading and mischievous both to medical 

 and geological science, 



Adanson (Hist. Nat. Senegal, 1757, Coquillages, p. 5) bestowed 

 this generic name on a diminutive and probably immature physoid 



