186 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MALACOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 



F. rejlexa and V. siliqua have been generally recognized as 

 distinct species, but I do not tbink a dividing line can be found. 

 According to Suter, the difference between them concerns the 

 escutcheon and the lamellae. The anastomosing of the lamellae may 

 at once be dismissed as of no classificatory importance, as in 

 specimens assigned to both forms the shell is more irregular in outline 

 and the lamellae are similarly irregular, The escutcheon also, when 

 present is small and variable. Finally, one other difference is 

 observed when comparing the descriptions given by Suter. The 

 right posterior cardinal is stated to be " small " in rejlexa, and 

 " strong, grooved " in siliqua. I have never seen it other than 

 grooved ; in fact, this is a character of the genus. I have examined 

 specimens from many parts of New Zealand, and find it impossible 

 to separate them into two groups. I therefore propose to unite the 

 nominal species rejlexa and siliqua under the first published name. 



17. Bassina disjecta (Perry). 



Venus disjecta, Perry, 1811, Conchology, pi. Iviii, fig. 3. 

 Venus lamellata, Lamarck, 1818, Anim. s. Vert., vol. v, p. 592. 

 Chione lamellata (Lamarck), Hutton, 1873, Cat. Mar. Moll. N.Z., p. 69. 

 CMone disjecta (Perry), Suter, 1913, Man. N.Z. Moll, p. 989, pi. Ixi, 

 fig. 5. ■ 



This species has been admitted to the fauna of New Zealand on 

 the evidence of two valves in the Dominion Museum. The original 

 labels bear no locality name, nor is any given when Hutton includes 

 the species in his Cat. Mar. Moll, of New Zealand. The species next 

 appears in Hutton Man. N.Z. Moll, p. 147, 1880, with the locality 

 Auckland, with Cheeseman as authority. Finally, Suter (1913) 

 gives Cook Strait as the locality and omits Auckland. The history 

 of this species is like that of Raeta perspicua, recorded above. In 

 his Manual, Hutton appears to have set himself the task of attaching 

 localities to the species he had previously included in his Catalogue 

 without any. Suter not only follows him without question, but goes 

 so far as to hunt up extra localities or change Hutton's. No good 

 can come to science by such methods. The simple fact is that the 

 Dominion Museum specimens have no authentic history. They, of 

 course, I might without fear of contradiction say, certainly came from 

 Australia, and the name should be struck off the list of New Zealand 

 Mollusca. 



18. Amphidesma subtriangulata. Wood. 



This appears to be a variable species, the extreme forms of which 

 are the thick, angled, triangular form from the north, and the 

 flattened, more ovate, form from Banks Peninsula and other localities 

 in the south. This last form is quoyi, which Iredale (Trans. N.Z. 

 Inst., vol. xlvii, p. 492, 1915), says Suter has confused in the 

 description of ventricosa. But this is not the case. Suter, probably 



( 



