46 W. T. Blanford— On the Identity, Sfe. [No. 1, 



been described by Pfeiffer under tbe name of B. Adenensis. The species is 

 at least as variable and nearly as widely spread as J3. coenopictus.* 



P. S. —Whilst the preceding paper was passing through the press, I 

 received a letter from Colonel R. H. Beddome, in which he told me that he 

 had compared, under the microscope, a specimen of Geostilbia Caledonica 

 with a shell which he found in north Canara, and that they were identical. 

 Now the north Canara shell was in all probability Achatina balanus, and 

 if this be the case, it follows that the identity of that form with G. caledo~ 

 nica which I have long suspected, and to which I have referred at p. 43, is 

 not merely generic, but specific. 



* In an excellent account of the land and freshwater shells of Borneo by Issel, also 

 published in the Annali del Museo Civico, Vol. VI, p. 366, I am credited with the 

 authorship of the genus Optediceros. This is a mistake. I never invented the genus, but 

 I shewed (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. Ser. 3, XIX, p. 381) that Optediceros of Leith, 

 described in the Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Boyal Asiatic Society, Vol. V, 

 p. 145, is identical with Assiminea. I think, too, it is to be regretted that a shell like 

 Assiminea cornea, Pfeiffer nee Leith, should still be referred to Hydrocena, and Assimi- 

 viea carinata, Lea to Omphalotropis. Martens long since pointed out (Malakoz. Blatt. 

 1864, p. 142,) that the type of Hydrocena belongs to a very different family, {Georissa is 

 very close to it if not identical,) whilst I have shewn (Ann. and Mag. N. H. 4, HI, p. 

 340) that Omphalotropis belongs to the Cyclostomidce. Assiminea on the other hand is a 

 Eissoid. 



