﻿IREDALE 
  : 
  ON 
  MISAPPLIED 
  GKNERIC 
  NAMES. 
  257 
  

  

  meridmialis, 
  Hedley, 
  though 
  perhaps 
  the 
  wiser 
  course 
  would 
  be 
  the 
  

   introduction 
  of 
  a 
  new 
  genus 
  or 
  subgenus 
  for 
  these 
  latter. 
  

  

  Biscosolis, 
  Dall, 
  Trans. 
  Wagner 
  Free 
  Inst. 
  Sci., 
  vol. 
  iii, 
  p. 
  331, 
  

   1892. 
  Type 
  : 
  Otnalaxis 
  nohilis, 
  Verrill, 
  Trans. 
  Conn. 
  Acad., 
  vol. 
  vi, 
  

   p. 
  423, 
  pi. 
  xliv, 
  fig. 
  12, 
  1885. 
  May 
  be 
  used 
  for 
  the 
  American 
  shells 
  

   with 
  Trochoid 
  opercula 
  ; 
  and 
  0. 
  exquisita, 
  Dall 
  & 
  Simpson, 
  may 
  be 
  

   here 
  located 
  until 
  the 
  opercular 
  characters 
  are 
  known. 
  

  

  Discohelix 
  (Biscosolis) 
  retifera, 
  Dall. 
  Should 
  be 
  transferred 
  to 
  

   Heliacus, 
  as 
  also 
  sliould 
  Omalaxis 
  amoena, 
  Murdoch 
  & 
  Suter. 
  

  

  Bifrontia 
  Pernambucensis, 
  Watson. 
  Does 
  not 
  belong 
  to 
  this 
  group 
  

   at 
  all, 
  but 
  I 
  am 
  unable 
  to 
  definitely 
  locate 
  it 
  in 
  any 
  known 
  genus. 
  

  

  Teachysma. 
  

  

  This 
  genus 
  was 
  introduced 
  by 
  Sars 
  (Moll. 
  Reg. 
  Arct. 
  IS^orv., 
  

   p. 
  211, 
  1878) 
  as 
  of 
  Jeffreys 
  MSS. 
  for 
  a 
  minute 
  shell 
  identified 
  by 
  

   Jeffreys 
  as 
  Cyclostoma 
  delicatmn, 
  Phil., 
  and, 
  according 
  to 
  Jeffreys, 
  

   identical 
  with 
  ' 
  Archith(sa 
  catenularia, 
  Costa'. 
  Apparently 
  Sars 
  

   was 
  sceptical 
  as 
  to 
  this 
  last 
  conjunction, 
  else 
  why 
  did 
  he 
  not 
  use 
  

   ' 
  Archithcea 
  ' 
  ? 
  The 
  facts 
  are 
  : 
  Philippi 
  described 
  a 
  Sicilian 
  fossil 
  as 
  

   Cyclostoma 
  (?) 
  delicaium 
  (Eniim. 
  Moll. 
  Sicil., 
  vol. 
  ii, 
  p. 
  222, 
  pi. 
  xxviii, 
  

   fig. 
  3, 
  1844) 
  ; 
  its 
  dimensions 
  are 
  given 
  as 
  " 
  Testa 
  5^'" 
  alta, 
  5%'" 
  lata", 
  

   Costa 
  proposed 
  his 
  genus 
  Architea 
  (Annuario 
  Miis. 
  Zool. 
  Napol., 
  

   A'ol. 
  V, 
  p. 
  52, 
  1869), 
  with 
  the 
  new 
  species 
  catenulata, 
  p. 
  53, 
  pi. 
  i, 
  

   fig. 
  4. 
  The 
  beautiful 
  figures 
  there 
  given 
  indicate 
  a 
  shell 
  quite 
  

   distinct 
  from 
  Philippi's 
  fossil; 
  the 
  size 
  is 
  13 
  x 
  9mm., 
  and 
  its 
  

   raultispiral 
  operculum 
  is 
  6 
  mm. 
  in 
  diameter. 
  The 
  shell 
  Sars 
  described, 
  

   upon 
  Jeffreys' 
  advice, 
  as 
  Trachysma 
  delicatmn, 
  Phil., 
  measured 
  

   I'l 
  X 
  1 
  mm., 
  with 
  a 
  variety 
  expansa 
  1'4 
  X 
  l'2mm. 
  That 
  these 
  three 
  

   shells 
  are 
  identical 
  seems 
  an 
  absurd 
  proposition, 
  whilst 
  I 
  liave 
  not 
  

   the 
  least 
  doubt 
  that 
  they 
  are 
  generically 
  distinct. 
  Poppe 
  (Abh. 
  Yer. 
  

   Erem., 
  vol. 
  viii, 
  p. 
  364, 
  1883) 
  records 
  that 
  Trachysma 
  delicatiim, 
  

   Phil., 
  was 
  found 
  alive 
  in 
  the 
  inlet 
  of 
  the 
  Jade, 
  Nortb-West 
  Germany, 
  

   and 
  that 
  the 
  dentition 
  was 
  Tsenioglossate. 
  It 
  is 
  difficult 
  to 
  say 
  what 
  

   Poppe 
  handled, 
  but 
  it 
  may 
  have 
  been 
  Sars' 
  shell. 
  Fischer 
  (Man. 
  

   de 
  Conch., 
  p. 
  714, 
  1885) 
  correctly 
  retained 
  Architea, 
  which 
  he 
  wrote 
  

   Archytcea, 
  indicating 
  its 
  probable 
  relationship 
  with 
  Solarium. 
  He 
  

   doubtfully 
  included 
  Trachysma 
  in 
  the 
  family 
  Adeorbiidse, 
  classing 
  

   Philippi's 
  fossil 
  and 
  Sars' 
  recent 
  shell 
  together, 
  and 
  wrote, 
  " 
  Cette 
  

   petite 
  coquille 
  classee, 
  par 
  0. 
  Sars, 
  dans 
  le 
  voisinage 
  des 
  Adeorlis, 
  

   a 
  ete 
  successivement 
  consideree 
  comme 
  Cyclostoma, 
  Janthina, 
  Architaa.''^ 
  

   I 
  have 
  been 
  unable 
  to 
  trace 
  the 
  fossil 
  Cyclostoma 
  (?) 
  delicatum, 
  Philippi, 
  

   in 
  recent 
  geological 
  literature, 
  so 
  am 
  unable 
  to 
  give 
  late 
  opinions 
  as 
  to 
  

   its 
  generic 
  location, 
  but 
  I 
  feel 
  certain 
  it 
  will 
  not 
  be 
  placed 
  in 
  Sars' 
  

   genus 
  Trachysma, 
  the 
  type 
  of 
  which 
  should 
  not 
  be 
  cited 
  as 
  delicatum, 
  

   Philippi, 
  whatever 
  else 
  it 
  may 
  be 
  called. 
  

  

  LlOTIA. 
  

  

  Liotiahas 
  been 
  quoted 
  as 
  of 
  Gray 
  (Syn. 
  Brit. 
  Mus., 
  1840 
  and 
  1842), 
  

   but 
  in 
  these 
  places 
  only 
  the 
  nude 
  name 
  occurs, 
  with 
  no 
  indication 
  as 
  

   to 
  species. 
  In 
  the 
  Proc. 
  Zool. 
  Soc. 
  Lond., 
  1847, 
  p. 
  145, 
  there 
  appears 
  

  

  VOL. 
  IX. 
  — 
  MARCH, 
  1911. 
  18 
  

  

  