" 
fl 
1888.] 141 [Meyer. 
ever, seems to be not quite constant, and the species are apparently allied. 
The only similar recent shell seems to be Pyramis striatula Couthouy * 
(=? Menestho albula Fabr.), which form, however, is much larger and 
without visible fold, apart of other differences. 
Turbonilla paucistriata? Jeffreys. Fig. 2. 
? Odostomia paucistriata Jeffreys ; Proc. Zodl. Soc., London, 1884, p. 
361) Pl 2%) fe. 6H 
The sinistral nucleus, which is twisted outwards, is followed by five 
‘adult whorls. They are flattened and covered by broad, flat, straight ribs, 
about fifteen on the last whorl. Suture impressed. Base rounded, smooth. 
Mouth pear-shaped. Outer lip thin. 
The interstices between the ribs are mere furrows.’ On the younger 
“whorls these furrows are not equal and not regularly arranged. Only two 
‘specimens were found, and they are, probably, not quite adult. The fig- 
ured one has a volution less than the other, but a perfect mouth. 
Turbonilla exarata H. C. Lea sp., of the same locality, is less slender, 
its whorls are more convex and the ribs are strong and obliquely set. 
Turbonilla subula H. C. Lea sp., of the same locality, is considerably 
stouter, has convex whorls and strong ribs. Turbonilla eburnea H. C. 
Lea sp., of the same locality, has sharply cut revolving strie between the 
ribs. The form agrees with the description and figure of T. paucistriata 
Jeff., but I have not been able to compare specimens of this recent species 
and therefore am not entirely certain about this determination. 
Astarte orbicularior n. sp. Fig. 6. 
Shell, thick, flat. Suborbicular, umboneal margins more or less straight- 
ened, ventral margin rounded. Beak very small, medial. Lunule flat, 
lanceolate. Hinge broad, cardinal teeth strong. Muscular impressions 
suboval, about equal, anterior one with separate auxiliar. Margin entire. 
Surface smooth or with a few concentric undulations. 
The species is flatter and more orbicular, than any one that has been 
described from the Atlantic Miocene. It is variable in form and young 
specimens are more convex, more trigonal, and the beak is turned more 
* Boston Journ. Nat. Hist., ii, p. 101, Pl. 1, fig. 6, and Gould, Invert. Mass., p. 269, fig. 
174. 
+J.G. Jeffreys, On the Mullusca procured during the Lightning and Porcupine Expe- 
dition. On page 364 the genus Mathilda is placed in the Pyramidellide. I considered 
this position of Mathilda probable in the Berichte d. Senckenberg. Naturforsch. 
Gesellsch., 1887, p. 6, without having been aware, at that time, that Jeffreys pronounced 
the same idea in 1884. 
On page 365, Pl. 27, fig. 10, Jeffrey’s describes the new genus Gegania. Iam not aware 
of any generic difference of this genus and Tuba J. Lea, and the recent Gegania pinguis 
Jeffreys, and the Eocene Tuba striata J. Lea (Contrib. to Geology, p. 128, Pl. 4, fig. 117) 
seem to be rather allied species. 
