1877.] Upper Burma and Tummn. 17 



Nanina (Sitala) .attegia, Bens. 

 Eelix attegia, Bons., A. & M. 1859 (Phio Than) ; Con. Indica, pi. 86, fig. 7. 



This species was found at Prome and Bhamo ; the museum also pos- 

 sesses specimens from Mouhnein, Assam, and Prei^aris Island. 



NANrtTA DiPLODON, Bens. 

 Eelix diplodon, Bens., A. & M. 1859, p. 187 (Teria Ghat) ; Con. Indica, pi, 60, fig. 8. 



A few specimens were found at the 2nd Defile below Bhamo and also 

 at Ponsee in Yumian. The outer tooth of the aperture varies slightly m 

 shape. This species seems to be allied to the Sesara group. 



Nakina (Rotfla) pansa, Bens. 

 Helix pansa, Bens., A. & M. 1856, p, 252 (Akoutong) ; Con. Indica, pi. 56, fig. 1. 

 Found at Prome and also at Kalawat. 



Nanina (Miceoctstis) barakporensis, Pfr. 

 Helix Barak'porensis, Pfr., P. Z. S. 1852, p. 156 (Titalya, &c.) ; Con. Indica, pi. 87, fig. 7. 

 Nanina (Kaliella) BaraJcporensis, (Pfr.) Blf., J. A. S. B. 



A single specimen only was found at Bhamo. The differences between 

 the sub-genera Kaliella and Microcystis appear to be not yet sufficiently 

 characterized. 



Helix (Plectoptlis) akdersont, Blf. 



Helix (PlectopylisJ Andersoni, Blf., P. Z. S. 1869, p. 448 ; Con. Indica, pi. 112, fig. 8 ; 



Godwin-Austen, P. Z. S. 1874, p. 612, pi. 74, fig. 9. 



This remarkable form was not obtained on the Second Expedition ; it 

 was originally found at Iloetone and Bhamo. 



Helix (Plectoteopis) tapeina, Bens. 

 Helix tap eina, Bens., J. A. S. B. 1836, p. 352, (Sj-lhet). 



The type specimens of Benson's IT. tapeina are in the Indian Museum. 

 Plate 15, fig. 6 of the Con. Indica well represents the form. It is distin- 

 guished from all other allied species by the less oblique columellar margiji, 

 rounded and not angular at the base (as are all its varieties) ; the keel at 

 the periphery is acute. Typical H. tapeina is found abundantly at Cherra 

 Punjee and in Assam. 



var. AKOUTOK&ENSis, Theob. 

 Helix aJcoivtongensis, Theob., J. A. S. B. 1859, p. 306 ; (not Con. Indica, pi. 15, fig. 4). 

 Only differs from the preceding by its more oblique columellar margin, 

 more acutely keeled periphery, slightly more open umbilicus, and more de- 

 pressed spire. I look upon this form as doubtfully separable from the next : 

 the differences may be merely perhaps incidental to individuals, and not 

 even to local races. 

 3 



