SMITH : MOLLUSCA OF TRINIDAD. 247 
I cannot agree with Guppy in placing with this species 
d’Orbigny’s Paludina piscium, P. Parchappit, and P. australis, 
or his Paludestrina affinis. 
41.—Ampullaria (Marisa) cornu-arietis (Linn.). 
It is doubtful whether the sub-generic division is worth 
retention ; in any case, however, Fischer is wrong in giving 
preference to Cevatodes of Guilding, as that so-called genus was 
published four years after A/arisa of Gray.* 1847, the date 
assigned by Fischery to the latter, is incorrect. After compari- 
son of a considerable series of specimens, I have failed to 
appreciate the specific distinctions assigned to A. zufermedia 
Gray, A. chiguitensts @Orbigny from Bolivia, and A. Kuorrt 
Philippi from Trinidad. It is possible that the slight difference 
referred to by Philippi may be sexual. The type of Ampul/aria 
is A. ampullacea Linn., and not A. urceus as stated by Fischer. 
_ 42.—Ampullaria urceus (Muller). 
The known distribution of this mollusc is far less extended 
than that of Bulimus oblongus as stated by Guppy. 
43.—Ampullaria (Pomus) glauca (Linn.). 
Ampullaria effusa Mull., Guppy, of. cez., p. 226. 
As Dillwyn, Deshayes, Philippi, Hanley, and others have 
many years ago shown that the above are synonymous, we are 
necessarily compelled to employ the older name glauca. ‘The 
distribution and other synonyms of this species are given by 
the writer in the Proceedings of the Malacological Society, 
VOL ty > BUC. 
44.—Neocyclotus translucidus (Sowerby). 
Cyclotus translucidus Sow., Guppy, of. cz., p. 226. 
MM. Crosse and Fischer have shown that the genus 
Cyclotus (Guilding) Swainson is not referable to this and other 
allied forms from the West Indies, for which they proposed the 
new genus /Veocyclotus. 
*Phil. Mag. and Journ., vol. 63, p. 274, 1824. 
{+Man. de Conch., p. 737- 
