1880.] W. T. Blanford — Contrihutions to Indian Malacalogy . 191 



found on the Garo, Khasi, and Naga hills by Colonel Godwin-Austen. The 

 shells from the Khasi hills have the filiform costulation on the upper sur- 

 face finer and less regular than those from the Assam side of the Naga 

 hills. In Khasi sliells 2, 3, or 4 ribs occur at nearly regular intervals, and 

 then a rib appears to be omitted ; this is not the case with those from up- 

 per Assam. 



The species scarcely differs from Tl. ornatissima, found on the other 

 side of the Brahmaputra valley at the base of the Sikkim hills, except iu 

 being imperforate. E. climacterica, of which Mr. Nevill considers the 

 present shell a variety, is always sharply keeled at the periphery. The two 

 forms may pass into each other, but I have never seen any intermediate 

 links ; and as they differ from each other much more than vidua does 

 from H. ornatissima, or E. climacterica from E. austeni, it is better to 

 have distinctive names for them. 



I am indebted to Col. Godwin-Austen for the following note on the 

 animal of H. vidua observed at Cherra Poonjee, Khasi hills. 



" Animal of a neutral grey tint about the neck and eye-tentacles, which 

 are rather long and fine, the oral tentacles are also of a dark tinge. Extre- 

 mity of foot truncated, with mucous gland. Body long and thin. No 

 tongue-like processes to the mantle observed." 



The genus JEuplecta was proposed by Semper* for two Ceylonese shells 

 Helix suhopaca and U. layardi. The latter of these is referred by both 

 Theobaldf and NevillJ to Situla, a position which is scarcely tenable, for 

 the animal of S. layardi is destitute of shell-lobes, whilst these are present 

 in Situla^ ; and tlie odontophox'es are very different, neither the shape nor 

 number of the teeth being similar. At the same time, I am rather doubt- 

 ful whether S. layardi should not be placed in a separate section from S. 

 suhopaca on account of differences both in the shell and odontophore. The 

 last-named species, however, is, 1 think, to be accepted as type. It is great- ■ 

 ly to be regretted that Semper should have adopted so loose and uncertain 

 a proceeding as to name two distinct forms as types of one genus. In such 

 a case, the only plan is to take the first-named — in this case, J£. suhopaca — ■ 

 as the type of Euplecta. 



The genus is thus defined by its author in German: — On the mantle 

 edge only neck-lobes are present, the left is divided into two separate lap- 

 pets {as in many Helices). Above the caudal gland there is a short horn. 

 The shell entirely exterior, ribbed or striated above, smooth below. On the 



* lleisen im Arcliipel der Philippinen, 2te tLeil, "Wis. Ees. vol. iii, p. 14. 



t Cat. p. 20. 



t Hand-list, p. 34. 



§ See, for description of the animal and odontophore of Situla (or Coiiuleiiia, which 

 is the same), Stoliczka, J, A. y. 13., iSTl, vol. xl, pt. 2, p. 2li6. 



