MIOCENE MOLLUSCA AND CRUSTACEA. 107 



and the spiral lines more distinctly elevated, while the aperture bears a 

 much greater proportion to the length of the shell than in that one. In this 

 one it is about two-fifths of the whole length, and in that one between one- 

 third and one-fourth of the whole length. And the texture of the shell is 

 here finer and more beautiful. I have frequently seen specimens of a shell 

 quite similar to this among collections from the extreme southern coast and 

 the West Indian seas, but usually about twice its size. I can now find no 

 specimens of these for comparison ; nor do I know any name for the recent 

 species, but think it very probable they may be nearly or quite identical. 



Formation and locality : From the gray micaceous marls of the Miocene, 

 at Shiloh, N. J. In the collection of the National Museum. 



Genus BUCCINANOPS D'Orb. 



BUCCINANOPS VARIABILIS n. Sp. 

 PI. XVII, figs. 13-18. 



Shell rather small, not exceeding five-eighths of an inch in total length; 

 the body of a somewhat subcylindrical form, sometimes wider below than 

 above, and sometimes the reverse; spire short-obtuse, or subturreted; volu- 

 tions of the spire round scalariform, with deep distinct sutures, the apical 

 ones often quite pointed and attenuated, with a small, rounded, mammillary 

 nucleus; aperture from half to three-fourths as long as the shell, according 

 to the length of the spire, channeled at each extremity and constricted 

 just below the suture on the body whorl, leaving the upper edge of the 

 volution protruding fold-like, the lip expanding again below; inner lip 

 extending upon the inner volution, forming a callosity which is thickened 

 above, bordering the posterior canal; lower canal channeling the base of 

 the columella within. Surface smooth, polished when entire, but generally 

 eroded, showing under a glass fine lines of growth. 



I had been inclined to consider this shell identical with Mr. Conrad's 

 Bulliopsis quadrata, from the inspection of his figure and description given 

 in the Am. Jour. Conch., vol. 2, p. 65, PL in, fig. 1; but upon examining his 

 original figure in the Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci., 1st ser., vol. 6, PI. ix, fig. 16, I 

 have come to the conclusion that it would be better to risk a new name as 



