132 G. Nevill — New or little-known [No. 3, 



used the name for the immature state of his own genus Cyclops ; his name 

 Nanina was therefore null and void and should not bar Gray's genus. 



As Colonel Godwin-Austen has lucidly explained, though he draws a 

 wrong conclusion, Nanina, Gray, is not the same as Ariophanta, Desmoulins, 

 but equals the latter' s group " Phereporae" ; it would never do to adopt the 

 specially separated section or subgenus of Ariophanta for the whole group, 

 any more than to replace Draparnaud's Pupa (1801) by the sectional name 

 Vertigo of Miiller (1788), which was specially introduced for the forms 

 with two tentacles only. By the method now universally adopted by all 

 the leading conchologists, all parties seem to me fairly treated. Gray has 

 his genus Nanina employed in a wide and comprehensive sense, as he in- 

 tended. Desmoulins and Benson have their names employed for their 

 respective strictly limited sections as they both originally intended. Ben- 

 son did not include Ariophanta in his Macrochlamys, as he calls it Garo- 

 colla, nor did Desmoulins do so in the reversed case. 



Nanina [Macrochlamys] pseudovitrinoides, n. sp. 



J. A. S. B., 1832, pp. 13 and 76, as Macrochlamys indica, sine descr. (not H. indica, 

 Pfr.) ; H. vitrinoides, Gray, P. Zool. S. 1849, pi. 2, f. 1-3, cum anim. [not H. vitrinoides, 

 Desh.] ; = H. petrosa, Bs., pars, [not of Hutton]. 



This is the common " snail" throughout the plains of the Gangetic 

 Delta, quite distinct, both as regards shell and animal, from its close ally 

 N. petrosa, Hutton, the type of which was from Mirzapore and which 

 takes the place of the former in the higher regions of Lower Bengal ; the 

 two species were confused together by Mr. Benson under the name of N. 

 indica, which he afterwards united to Hutton's N petrosa; he could have 

 seen but few specimens of our Calcutta form and those probably not living 

 ones ; Mr. Hanley does not represent our species in his invaluable Con. 

 Indica, but gives a very fair figure of N petrosa. The two varieties of N. 

 petrosa recorded in my Handlist must be altogether eliminated ; I am in- 

 debted to my friends Colonel Mainwaring and Mr. J. Caldwell for other 

 specimens from Lucknow and Monghyr of N petrosa, and to Mr. J. Wood- 

 Mason for a fine series of N pseudovitrinoides from Silhet. 



I think Pfeiffer's PI. 110, figs. 10-12 of the Conch. Cab. II, [not figs. 

 13-15] represents N. pseudovitrinoides. 



Nanina [Macrochlamys ?] sikrigaltensis, G. Nevill. 



I described this species, from Sikrigali in Behar, in my Handlist 

 page 28 ; unfortunately the name was misprinted N sikrigallensis ! I 

 may also take this opportunity of recording that species No. 73, page 28, 

 1. c., should be N. cordemoyi, not ' condemoyi ' as printed. The species being 

 called after Mons. Jacob de Cordemoy, a distinguished Mascarenc botanist. 



