JACKSON: THE CANDIDULA SECTION OF HELICEI.LA. I99 



The var. alpicola was described by Stabile in 1864^ as follows: — 

 " [H. unifasciata] var. \i alpicola iiiihi; minor, tenuiuscula, apertiira 

 magis rotundata, apice corneo-fiisca^fasciis angustis, pallidis, inlerrnptis, 

 evanescentibus. Haut. 4"5. Diam. 6"5 mill. =^7". «///>/«? Megerle 

 non Faure-Biguet." 



A critical examination of the Ilford and Woodston specimens 

 reveals several characters whereby they differ from the above variety, 

 as well as from any form of If. candidula with which I am acquainted. 



The Woodston and Ilford shells, which are 5-whorled, are distinctly 

 keeled and depressed, and the aperture, instead of being round, is 

 compressed and of a somewhat squarish outline, with a tooth-like 

 protuberance at the base ; the umbilicus is large and open, exposing 

 a large part of the penultimate whorl and the interior of the columella; 

 the striation is of the rough type as in H. cciperata and unlike that of 

 H. candidula and its varieties. 



The banding is well preserved in many of the shells, and consists of 

 one broad band above the periphery (this band borders the suture of 

 the upper whorls almost to the apex), and two to three broad bands 

 below the periphery. One or other of the latter bands is occasionally 

 split in half, thus producing four bands. 



The dimensions of 12 adults from Ilford are: — diam. max. 

 6'5 X 375, min. 5'2o x 3-20 ; alt. max. 375 x 6'5, min. 3'io x 5-30 mm. 

 Three adults from Woodston (in Coll. J.U.D.) measure 6*20 x 375 \ 



5'5o^3'5o; 5"5o=^ 3"25 mm. 



These discrepancies are such as to negative entirely the idea of the 

 specific identity of the AVoodston-Ilford specimens (and likewise those 

 from Crayford and Barnwell) with H. candidula Studer. They do 

 not appear to agree with any described continental Helicella, recent 

 or fossil. German authorities, Dr. F. Haas and others, to whom I 

 submitted specimens, support my contention that they certainly do 

 not belong to H. candidula, but are the Pleistocene ancestors of 

 recent English H. intersecta (=^caperatci) — so far undescribed and 

 well deserving a name. 



This suggestion is interesting but requires further careful investiga- 

 tion. Pending such study, which can only be made when more 

 material is available, it seems desirable that the shell in question 

 should receive some distinctive name, and the most suitable one, in 

 my opinion, is that of H. crayfordensis (A. S. Kennard, MS.), as 

 indicating the locality where the species was originally discovered. 



I Moll. Piemont, p. 48. 



