KONGL. SV. VET. AKADEMIENS HANDLINGAR. BAND 27. N:0 3. 141 



This characteristic form is but imperfectly known, as no valves in a favourable position 

 have been examined. It seems impossible to find a place for this species in any of the above sub- 

 genera, tlie nature of the striation being entirely different, and closely similar to that of the 

 Lineolatce of Navicula, of which section it might be an asymmetrical form. 



9. A. Naumanni Jan. (1876). — Frustule sublinear, with slightly rostrate ends. L. 0,o5; 

 B. 0,012 mm., bordered with a narrow limbus. Zone on the dorsal side with two rows of puncta. 

 V. narrow; its dorsal side with about 10 strise in 0,oi mm. Ventral side smooth with a longitu- 

 dinal line. — A. S. Atl. XXXIX f. 19. 



Marine : ? 



It is impossible to decide the position of this form, which I know only from the figs. in 

 Atl. representing entire frnstules. It may be akin to Ä. pusilla Cl. or to A. Wittsteinii. 



Amphorce placed in the other genera. 

 A. Digitus A. S., Pinnularia amhigua Cl. 

 A. naviculacea Donk., Pinnularia Stauntonii Grun. 



Doiihtful, or imperfectly Jcnown, Amxjliorte. 



A. acuta var. neogena Pant. (III Pl. XII f. 187 1893); belongs to the subgenus Oxyamp)hora. 



A. amphioxyn Bail. (Smiths. Contr. 1852 p. 39 Pl. II f. 20 to 22) is acoording to Hamilton 

 Smith Hanizschia amphioxys, which appears to be beyond doubt. 



A. andcsitica Pant. (III Pl. XIII f 205; 1893). 



A. Argiis Pant. (III Pl. XXII f 329; 1893) seems to be akin to A. ovalis. 



A. Beccarii. De Notaris (Exb. Crit. ital. Ser. II N:o 633) unknown to the author. 



A. hudayana Pant. (III Pl. XXIII f. 336). 



A. hullosa. FioR. Mäzz. (Atti. Soc. crit. ital. 1879 p. 104. Colletonema hullosum Fior. Mazz. 

 Atti. Acad. Pont. N. Lincei 1861 Pl. I fig. 1 — 5) unknown to the author, not having seen the 

 original paper. 



.1. cingulata Pant. (II Pl. XXV f. 369; 1889) is an indeterminable fragment of some diatom. 



A. coarctata Leub. Fortm. (D. de Ceylon Pl. II f. 18; 1879) impossible to identify. 



A. cristata Petit (D. de Campbell p. 18 Pl. IV f. 8; 1877) is unknown to me, but seems 

 to be a remarkable species, which however is too imperfectly figured and described to decide as 

 to its place in the system. 



A. eunoticeformis Grun. (A. S. Atl. XXXIX f. 5) seems to be a Navicula akin to Nav. 

 rhombica. 



A. invidenda Pant. (III Pl. XIV f. 210; 1893). 



A. Kossuthii Pant. (III Pl. X f. 169; 1893). 



A. lutea Leud. Fortm. (D. de Ceylon Pl. I f. 10; 1879) an indeterminable connecting zone 

 of some diatom. 



A. munda A. S. (Atl. XL f. 15; 1876) no Amphora, but a frustule of a Tropidoneis, akin 

 to T. Lepidoptera. 



A. naviformis Leud. Fortm. (D. de Malaisie Pl. I f. 6; 1892) probably Hanteschia marina. 



A. ohtecta Bail. (H. L. Smith Lens p. 77 Pl. II f. 12) cannot be identified. Possibly a form 

 of A. Grevilleana. 



A. obtusiuscula Grun. (A. S. Atl. XXV f. 7; 1875) seems to be a Navicula of the section 

 Fiisiformes. 



A. rectangiilaris Greö. (T. M. S. 1857 p. 70 Pl. I f. 29) represents in Hamilton Smiths opi- 

 nion, in which I agree, some Statironeis. 



A. rimosa Ehb. (Am. p. 79; 1843; M. G. V: i f. 27). 



A. Schmidtii Petit (Campbell D. p. 17 A. S. Atl. XXVII f. 51). 



