﻿256 
  PllOCKKDINGS 
  OK 
  THK 
  MALACOLOGICAL 
  SOCIKTr. 
  

  

  with 
  P. 
  Macandreivi, 
  Iredale, 
  as 
  they 
  agree 
  well 
  in 
  conchological 
  

   characters, 
  though 
  it 
  maj' 
  be 
  that 
  they 
  will 
  be 
  found 
  to 
  differ 
  when 
  

   their 
  opercula 
  are 
  obtained. 
  Murdoch 
  and 
  Suter's 
  Onialaxis 
  amoena 
  

   (Trans. 
  New 
  Zeal. 
  Inst., 
  vol. 
  xxxviii, 
  p. 
  293, 
  pi. 
  xxiv, 
  figs. 
  30-2, 
  

   1905 
  (1906)), 
  which, 
  when 
  described, 
  was 
  compared 
  with 
  Ball's 
  

   D. 
  retifera, 
  is 
  certainly 
  also 
  a 
  species 
  of 
  Heliacus. 
  

  

  However, 
  Hedley 
  (Memoirs 
  Aust. 
  Mas., 
  vol. 
  iv, 
  p. 
  351, 
  fig. 
  74, 
  

   1903) 
  proposed 
  a 
  new 
  species, 
  Omalaxis 
  meridional 
  is, 
  which 
  seems 
  to 
  

   agree 
  quite 
  closely 
  with 
  the 
  fossil 
  Bifrontia 
  (?) 
  %anclcea, 
  Philippi, 
  and 
  

   this 
  is 
  of 
  much 
  interest, 
  as 
  Tate 
  has 
  often 
  remarked 
  upon 
  the 
  survival 
  

   of 
  European 
  Eocene 
  in 
  Australian 
  form-i, 
  e.g. 
  Trans. 
  Koy. 
  Soc. 
  South 
  

   Aust., 
  vol. 
  xxiii, 
  p. 
  243, 
  when 
  referring 
  a 
  Rissoiria 
  to 
  a 
  Parisian 
  

   Eocene 
  group. 
  Hedley's 
  Omalaxis 
  radiata 
  (Proc. 
  Linn. 
  Soc. 
  N.S.W., 
  

   vol. 
  xxxii, 
  p. 
  506, 
  pi. 
  xx, 
  figs. 
  53-5, 
  1907) 
  looks 
  like 
  a 
  Pseudomalaxis. 
  

   Watson's 
  B. 
  Pernamhuceiisis 
  (Chall. 
  Zool. 
  liep., 
  vol. 
  xv, 
  p. 
  137, 
  

   pi. 
  viii, 
  figs. 
  1-3, 
  1885), 
  as 
  Hedley 
  has 
  pointed 
  out 
  (E,ec. 
  Aust. 
  Mus., 
  

   vol. 
  vi, 
  p. 
  357, 
  1907), 
  would 
  be 
  better 
  placed 
  elsewhere, 
  though 
  

   I 
  doubt 
  whether 
  Liotia 
  is 
  a 
  suitable 
  genus, 
  as 
  shown 
  hereafter. 
  

  

  Before 
  leaving 
  this 
  subject 
  it 
  maj^ 
  be 
  of 
  interest 
  to 
  note 
  the 
  

   effect 
  of 
  the 
  presence 
  of 
  the 
  ' 
  anastrophic 
  ' 
  apex 
  in 
  the 
  determination 
  

   of 
  the 
  relationship 
  of 
  these 
  shells. 
  This 
  term 
  was 
  introduced 
  by 
  

   Dautzenberg 
  and 
  Fischer 
  (Mem. 
  Soc. 
  Zool. 
  France, 
  vol. 
  ix, 
  p. 
  57, 
  

   1 
  896) 
  for 
  the 
  inverted 
  pseudosinistral 
  apex 
  observed 
  in 
  shells 
  belonging 
  

   to 
  the 
  genus 
  Solarium. 
  It 
  is 
  characteristic 
  of 
  shells 
  belonging 
  to 
  the 
  

   genera 
  Architectoniea 
  (= 
  Solarium) 
  and 
  Heliacus, 
  and 
  of 
  all 
  the 
  shells 
  

   previously 
  referred 
  to 
  Omalaxis 
  and 
  Bifrontia, 
  save 
  B. 
  Pertiatnbacensis, 
  

   AVatson. 
  Consequently 
  I 
  advocate 
  the 
  transference 
  of 
  this 
  shell 
  from 
  

   the 
  neighbourhood 
  of 
  these 
  Omalaxoid 
  shells. 
  

  

  I 
  would 
  summarize 
  the 
  results 
  I 
  obtain 
  as 
  follows 
  : 
  — 
  

  

  Omalaxis, 
  Deshayes, 
  Ency. 
  Method. 
  Vers., 
  vol. 
  iii, 
  p. 
  659, 
  1832. 
  

   Type: 
  Solarium 
  disjunctum. 
  Lam. 
  (Ann. 
  Mus. 
  Paris, 
  vol. 
  iv, 
  p. 
  55, 
  

   1804). 
  Should 
  be 
  restricted 
  to 
  fossil 
  forms 
  agreeing 
  with 
  the 
  type, 
  

   and 
  eliminated 
  for 
  the 
  present 
  from 
  the 
  study 
  of 
  recent 
  conchology. 
  

   Bifrontia, 
  Deshayes 
  (Coq. 
  Foss. 
  Paris, 
  vol. 
  ii, 
  p. 
  221, 
  1833) 
  is 
  an 
  

   absolute 
  synonym, 
  having 
  the 
  same 
  shell 
  as 
  type. 
  

  

  Bifrontia 
  zanclcea. 
  Gray, 
  Ann. 
  Mag. 
  ITat. 
  Hist., 
  vol. 
  xi, 
  p. 
  260, 
  

   1853 
  ; 
  Hanley, 
  Thes. 
  Conch., 
  vol. 
  iii, 
  p. 
  246, 
  pi. 
  254 
  (v), 
  figs. 
  101-3, 
  

   1863. 
  Is 
  specially 
  distinct 
  from 
  Bifrontia 
  {^) 
  %ancl(Ba, 
  Phil. 
  (Enum. 
  

   Moll. 
  Sicil., 
  vol. 
  ii, 
  p. 
  225, 
  pi. 
  xxviii, 
  fig. 
  11, 
  1844), 
  and 
  should 
  bear 
  

   the 
  name 
  Pseudomalaxis 
  Macandreivi, 
  Iredale. 
  

  

  Pseudomalaxis, 
  Fischer 
  (Man. 
  de 
  Conch., 
  1885, 
  p. 
  714). 
  Was 
  

   introduced 
  for 
  the 
  recent 
  shell 
  confused 
  with 
  Philippi's 
  fossil, 
  and 
  

   therefore 
  the 
  type 
  is 
  P. 
  Macandreivi, 
  Iredale. 
  I 
  do 
  not 
  consider 
  it 
  

   should 
  be 
  used 
  for 
  the 
  fossil 
  forms 
  agreeing 
  with 
  the 
  true 
  Bifrontia 
  (?) 
  

   zanclcea, 
  Philippi. 
  Probable 
  members 
  of 
  this 
  genus 
  are 
  the 
  shells 
  

   described 
  as 
  Homalaxis 
  cornu-ammonis, 
  Melvill 
  & 
  Standen, 
  S. 
  rotula- 
  

   catherina, 
  Melvill 
  & 
  Standen, 
  and 
  Omalaxis 
  radiata, 
  Hedley. 
  

  

  Biscolielix, 
  Dunker, 
  Palaontograpkica, 
  vol. 
  i, 
  p. 
  132, 
  1847. 
  Type 
  : 
  

   B. 
  calculiformis, 
  pi. 
  xviii, 
  fig. 
  11. 
  Might 
  be 
  used 
  for 
  Bifrontia 
  {^) 
  

   zanclcea, 
  Philippi, 
  and 
  here, 
  tentatively, 
  may 
  be 
  referred 
  Omalaxis 
  

  

  