CC^OKE : ON AI.OPIA CYCLOSTOMA, A. CANESCENS AND A. DEANIANA. 303 



not refer to them. How the original error of referring the habitat to 

 the Korean Archipelago crept in cannot now be determined, but the 

 specimens are Cumingian. 



E. A. Bielz, in Verb. Siebenb. Ver., Ix, 1858, p. 147, described a new 

 Balea cydostoma from the Bucsecs, but when these non-clausiate 

 Carpathian Balea or Baleo-Clausilia became classified as Clausilia, his 

 name cydostoma became preoccupied. * Pfeiffer, Novitates ii, 1865, 

 p. 265, pi. 66, f. 4-6, accordingly substituted " Clans. Pomatias Pfr. in 

 coll. olim,"and in the Mo7t. Hel. Viv. 1868, vi, p. 397, he has CI. pom- 

 atias Pfr. in litt. as synonym of Bal. cydostoma Biz. Clessin's 1881 

 edn. of the Nometidator prints in error (p. 368) " Alopia pomatias 

 Parr." 



Boettger in Rossmassler's Iconogr., vi, 1878-9, p. 54, no. 1683 pi. 

 167, f. 1683, gives a full description of Clausilia (^Balea) pomatias 

 Pfr., and the species will now rank as Alopia pomatias (Pfr.). 

 Alopia canescens Charpentier. 



Charpentier described, without figure, in Journ. de Conchyl., iii, 

 1852, p. 364, the shell to which Parreyss (a dealer in Vienna who 

 acquired Ziegler's collections) was said to have given the nis. name of 

 canescens, with habitat " Transylvania " : — " Differt a praecedente 

 \straminicollis Charp.], cui habitu persimilis, testa contractiore, 

 subturrito-fusiformi, omnino laevigata, pruinosa ; plicis palatalibus 

 nuUis. Alt. 13 ; diam. 4 mill." 



Ad. Schmidt, Boettger, and Clessin all denote by the name canescens 

 Charp. the species from the top of the Piatra Mare, which has three 

 plicae palatales, and therefore cannot be Charp. 's catiescens. The 

 authors try to get over this by saying that two identical shells were 

 sent by Parreyss to Charp. and Rossm. for description : some mixture 

 of labels took place, and the shell described by Charp. (1852) as 

 canescens, and by Rossm. -^ as glorifica, was not that to which Parreyss 

 gave the ms. name canescens. However this may be, we cannot go 

 behind Charp.'s description, which has priority, and the question arises, 

 what species is it ? Not many Alopia combine a smooth shell with 

 absence of plicae palatales and a length of 13 mm. Kimakovicz 

 (Prodromus,' p. 28) refers to it the Alopia from the upper part of 

 the Czukas ; Bielz, his dextral form of Balea ladea (Verb. Siebenb. 

 Ver. iv, 1853, p. 163) which he first described as livida Menke var. 

 ladea, reputed to come from the Czukas, but whose true habitat 

 turned out to be the Bucsecs. 



I am inclined to agree with Kimakovicz, but a further difficulty lies 

 in Charpentier's words ' cui [straminicolli] persimilis.' It is not easy 



1 Malak. Blalt., iii, 1856, p. 198. 



