86 On some new marine Gastropoda. [No. 2, 



3. O. brachycephalus, Morch, Loc. ? This species would seem 

 to require confirmation, Morch having merely described it from 

 H. & A. Adams' figure, intended for 0. Sieboldii, from which, how- 

 ever, he states it differs too much to be possibly the same species. 



4. ,, Krolmii, A. Ad., Sandwich I. 



5. ,, pellucidus, ,, Loc. ? 



6. „ Antillarum, Orst and Morch, St. Thomas. 



7. ,, viridis, Pease, Sandwich I. 



8. „ Cumingii, A, Ad., W. Columbia. 



9. ,, Vigourouxii Montr, and Souv., N. Caledonia. 



There can be no doubt, the two last named species, must be re- 

 moved to the genus Volvatella, Pease, (see Amer. Journ of Conch., 

 1868, Pt. 2). 



We have also here described two species of the rare genus Gylin- 

 drobidla, formed by Fischer in the Journ. de Conch, of 1857, for 

 a species, from Guadaloupe, G Beauii ; the only other species, as yet 

 described, is from South Australia, G. Fischeri, Ad. and Ang. 



Of Krohn's genus Lobiger, two species have been described from 

 the Mediterranean, L. Philipii, Krohn, and L. corneus, Morch ; a third 

 named is from Guadaloupe, L. Souverbii, Fisch., and a fourth from 

 Polynesia, by H. Pease, L. pecta. (Amer. Journ. of Conch. 1868, 

 Pt. 2). 



Three species of Broderipia are known from the Philippines, B. 

 iridescens, Brod., B. rosea, Brod., and B. Cwmingii, A. Ad. A fourth 

 was described from Bourbon by Deshayes, B. nitidissi?na, the same 

 writer records B. iridescens, as occurring at the same locality ; 

 we have also ourselves found at Ceylon, the rare and pretty species 

 B. rosea and add a new species under the name of B. eximia. 



The only species of the Delphinulince at all closely allied to the 

 shell here described, Gyclostrema sub-disjuncta, H. Ad., is Delpliinida 

 nivea, Chemn. Indeed we do not feel quite sure, but that the present 

 is the species originally described under that name, and that the shell 

 described and figured for it by Kiener and Reeve, may prove to be 

 a different one, certainly the two figures in Kiister's Conchylien- 

 Cabinet, one after Chemnitz, the other after Kiener, belong to per- 

 fectly distinct species ; the present shell, if not the same, is very close 

 to the former, but differs essentially from the latter. 



