THE INDIAN VARIETIES AND RACES OF THE GENUS 
TURBINELLA. 
By JAMES HORNELL, Government Marine Biologist, Madras. 
(Plates X—XII). 
Like the Mae represented by mankind, that of the Indian conchs belonging to 
the oa Turbinella is not an ideal one née of a single predominant variety; ; 
The species was first described by Linnaeus under the name of Voluta pyrum, 
but unfortunately this name was given to a form which, in my opinion, is not the 
=F, entral one, but is a variety probably thrown off by a stock which resembled more 
ely one a the other existing varieties. However, as it is at present difficult to 
ove the truth of this hypothesis, and as, after all, names are but labels with which 
‘ace 
u, fiaciading Linnaeus’ type as one, I distinguish five well-marked sub- “species or 
+ Er.  varieties, namely: — 
is (a) var. obtusa, var. nov., 
(b) var. acuta, var. nov., 
(c) var. fusus, Sowerby, 
(d) var. globosa, var. nov., and 
(e) var. comorinensis, var. nov. 
The first three I consider equally important and equal in classificatory value ; 
regarding the two last, I am as yet somewhat doubtful as to whether they have 
à sufficient stability of form to be considered more than strongly marked local races of 
limited permanence; I incline, however, to think both will prove to be good varieties. 
The names now given to all these are new except that of fusus. I had hoped to give 
Gmelin’s name vapa to the variety I call acuta, but this proved impossible as I find 
Gmelin’s rapa to be no more than an inflated and less obtuse form of the variety 
described by Linnaeus. 
I did not arrive at this conclusion of specific identity without difficulty, for if the 
_ more emphatic individuals of each form only be compared, unity of species seems 
_ impossible. Fortunately I have had the opportunity of comparing thousands of 
u 'shells from the principal Indian localities where Turbinella is found, and from the 
