MUSEUM OF COMPARATIVE ZOOLOGY. 251 
Conrad’s name as it has been traditionally applied, I find the next name in 
order, to be Leda cuneata of Sowerby, which from specimens identified by 
Hanley (and coming from Catalina Island, California) is quite evidently the 
same as L. jamaicensis D’Orbigny. The latter author described and figured a 
young specimen, so that the magnified figure he gives agrees only with speci- 
mens of the same age; but, for them, it is very exact. I have examined a 
large number of L. commutata Phil., and, while it is very similar, I cannot 
convince myself that it is the same. The commutata generally has one very 
strong anterior rib, and the acuta has a shallow groove bordered by two faint 
ribs. This is the most obvious character, though there are others. The L. unca 
of Gould was not figured and the description is brief. It is described as hav- 
ing the dorsal area keeled and smooth, characters not appropriate to any of 
the just mentioned forms, though shared by the proportionally more elongate 
L. Bushiana Verrill, which is not “ acutely rostrate.” The vitrea, acuta, 
and second wnca of Verrill all have the dorsal area strongly sculptured, even 
when worn; more so, generally, than the rest of the shell. None of these 
therefore should be identified with wnca Gld. Verrill’s second unca (1. c., p. 260), 
which seems distinct from either vitrea or acuta, may take the name of Ver- 
rilliana. The variety cerata is united with the typical vitrea by intermediate 
forms. 
Leda acuta Conran. 
Nucula acuta Conrad, Am. Mar. Conch., p. 82, pl. vi. fig. 8, 1831. 
Leda jamaicensis D’Orbigny (1846), Dall, Bull. M. C. Z., IX. p. 124, 1881. 
Leda cuneata Sowerby, P. Z. S., 1882, p. 198. 
Leda inornata A. Adams, fide Hanley, from type. 
Leda unca Verrill, Trans. Conn. Acad., V. p. 572, 1882, pl. lviii. fig. 41 (not VI. 
p. 260.) 
Plate VII. Figs. 3a, 3b, 8. 
Habitat. Sand Key, 80 fms.; off Sombrero, 54 and 72 fms.; Jamaica, Santo 
Domingo (D’Orb.); off southern New England, 85-155 fms, (Verrill). Florida 
(Hemphill). 
The relations of this species to the others have been considered under the 
preceding species. I have not been able to consult Conrad’s original publica- 
tion, but Binney (Bibl. N. Am. Conch.), citing from it, refers the species to Say. 
In other places Conrad puts his own name after it. 
The specimens from Yucatan Strait cited in the preliminary report under 
this species, on further study, appear to be L. messanensis Seg. L. commutata 
Phil., as before mentioned, appears to be different from this, though a closely 
allied form. The frayilis of Chemnitz, a badly figured and described shell, to 
which Dr. Jeffreys would refer L. commutata, is much larger than any known 
commutata, and is referred by Hanley to a Chinese species. Doubtless Chem- 
nitz would have included commutata in his species. The Lembulus deltoideus 
