﻿LOXONEMA. 175 



2. LOXONEMA NEXILE, SowerblJ, Sp. 



1840. Terebra nexilis, Sowerly (pars). Geo]. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pi. liv, 



fig. 17 (larger figure only). 



1840. Melania aecuata, Mionster. Beitr., p. 83, pi. xv, fig. 2. 



1841. Loxonema nexilis, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 99, pi. xxxviii, figs. 183 a — c. 

 1849. — arcuata, d'Orbigny. Prodrome, p. 63. 



1854. — nexilis, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 254. 



1855. — — M'Coy. Brit. Pal. Foss., p. 399. 



1873. — arcuatum, Kayser. Deutsch. geol. Gesell., vol. xxv, p. 636, 



pi. xxi, fig. 6. 

 ]880. — communis, Maurer. Neues Jalirb. f. Min., Beil.-Band i, p. 30, 



pi. ii, figs. 10, 11. 



1887. — nexilis, CEhlert. Bull. Soc. d'Etud. Sci. d' Angers, p. 11, 



pi. vii, fig. 2. 



1888. — — Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 



Description. — Shell rather small, very elongate, of numerous whorls. Whorls 

 very broad, being in height about three-quarters the diameter of the shell at that 

 point, rather flatly convex. Suture simple, shallow. Ornamentation consisting 

 of fine, strong, regular, rather arched ridges, divided by similar furrows, concave 

 towards the mouth except on the lowest part of the body-whorl, where they 

 become slightly convex, tending rather forwards from apex to base, and meeting 

 at the suture at an obtuse angle, immediately below which each ridge bears a 

 small tubercle ; between forty or fifty ridges on each whorl. 



Size. — Height of a specimen retaining rather more than two whorls about 14 

 mm., width 8 mm. 



Localities. — There is a fragmentary specimen in the Battersby Collection of 

 the Torquay Museum, which is probably from Lummaton. Sowerby's type, from 

 South Petherwyn, is in the Woodwardian Museum. 



Remarks. — The specimens of this shell which I have examined are very 

 defective, and give few data for determining its characters. They appear, 

 however, to agree accurately with the shell described almost synchronously by 

 Sowerby and Miinster. As Phillips, who wrote only a year later, gives the 

 priority to the former author, I have followed him in adopting Sowerby's name. 

 Kayser's figure has decidedly finer strias and more convex whorls, so that I have 

 some hesitation in regarding his shell as identical. 



Under the name L. nexile, however, Sowerby has figured two specimens, which, 

 as M'Ooy points out, clearly belong to two distinct species. M'Coy takes the larger 

 of the two as the type of the species, as Phillips had evidently done before him, and 

 it is this specimen only that agrees with Miinster's shell and with our specimen. 



