SYSTEMATIC LIST OF 



SPECIES 



PUBLISHED UP TO 1874.' 



BIVALVES. 



Tajts-siphon. 

 rivalis, Bn. t. 116, f. 1, 4. 



NOTACULINA. 



Gangetica, Bn. t. 116, f . 7 : var. 

 f. 10. 



PiSIDlUM. 



Clarkiannm, Xev. t. 155, f. 9. ' 



Ctclas. 

 Indica, D. t. 155, f. Kl. Q 

 Avana,2 Th. (Ava). \ 



CORBICULA.3 



Beugalensis, Desh. t. 155, f. 6. 

 Bensoni, D. t. 138, f. 1, 4. 

 Cashmirensis, D. t. 138, f. 2, 3. 

 ■Iravadica, Bl. t. 155, f. \. g 

 occidens, D. t. 138, f. 8, 9. 



i regularis. Prime, t. 138, f. 5, 6. 

 istriatella, D. t. 138, f. 7, 10. 

 ^trigoiia, D. t. 155, f. 7. 



. i Scaphola. 

 : colox, Bn. t. 116, f. 8, 9. 

 Delta;, Bl. t. 116, f. 2, 3. 

 pinna, Bn. t. 116, f. 5, 6. 



Mycetopus. 

 Bensonianus,* Lea, t. 9, f. 1 (e 

 Soleniformis). 



Trigonodon. 

 crebristriatum, t. 9, f. 3, 5. 



I PSEUDODON. 



j AviB,5 Tb. (Ava). 



j inoscularis, Gould, t. 9, f. 3. 



Unio.*^ 

 Birmanns, Bl. t. 42, f. 1. 

 Bhamoensis, Tb. t. 155, f. 2. 

 Bonneaudi, Byd. and Soul., t. 10, 



16; t. 46, f. 5, 6. 

 casruleus. Lea, t. 12, f. 3. • 

 consobrinus,'' Lea, t. 41, f. 7. 

 corbis, Bn. t. 45, f. 10. 

 corrugatus,^ Miil. t. 44, f. 5, 6 ; t. 



45, f. 2 to 5. 

 crispatus, Gould, t. 45, f. 1. 

 crispisTilcatus, Bn. t. 11, f. 5. 

 exolescens, Gould, t. 107, f. 5. 

 favidens,9 Bn. t. 11, f. 1, 2, 3 ; t. 41, 



f. 3 ; t. 42, f. 2. 

 Feddeni,'" Th. (River Pemgunga, 



CI. India.) 

 i foliaceus, Gould, t. 42, f. 3. 



' The Editors do not acknowledge the validity of macy of 

 these species, but merely illustrate them : as to the arrangement 

 it does not pretend to be scientific, but useful for grouping the 

 allied forms of shells, not moUusks. Some specie.s only just 

 published have been added in our last part to fill up vacancies 

 in the plates. 



- Journ. Asi. Soe. Ben. 1873, pt. 2, pi. 17. 



' In Prime's monograph of this genus we find recorded as 

 Indian five of his species, which are wholly unknown to us : C. 

 subradiata (An. Lyc. N. York, 1864, vol. 8, p. 75, f. 23), C. 

 Agrensis (do. f. 24), C. parvula (do. p. 76, f. 25), C. consan- 

 guinea (do. ]867, vol. 8, p. 417), C. imperialis (do. 1869, vol. 0). 

 The last is stated to come from Pondicherry, always a suspicious 

 locality ; the two first are probably immature, the two next in- 

 sufficiently defined. Chemnitz (Conch. Cab. vol. 6, f. 321) has 

 erroneously identified as the fluviatilis of Miiller, a Tanjore 

 shell which may possibly be intended for occidens. The 

 Veloritse being estuary shells (C. Cyprinoides, Gray, and C. 

 Cochinensis, Han.) are purposely omitted. 



■* Lea justly remarks that although edentulous when mature, 

 the young have manifest teeth. The name has been changed | 



because D'Orbiguy had previou.sly published a Soleniformis in 

 Guerin's Maff. de Zool. 



' MonocoudylKa Avae, Th. J. Asi. Soc. Beng. 1873, pt. 2, p. 

 209, pi. 17, f. 6. 



" It is possible that the U. luteus of Lea (J. Ac. Philad. 

 n. s. vol. 3, pL 24, f. 4) from Newville, Tavoy, may be identical 

 with one of our list, but the specimen delineated was in too Ijad 

 a condition for positive recognition. 



" The U. exanthematicus of Kuster's Chemnitz (Unio, p. 243, 

 pi. 81, f. 2) has somewhat the aspect of this shell ; it is said to 

 come from that indefinite locahty the " E. Indies." 



" Moreh states the U, gibbus of Spengler (Skriv. Nat. 

 Kioben. vol. 3, pt. 1) said to come from Tranquebar, is allied to 

 this : its Latin description is utterly inadequate for the purpose 

 of identification. 



* To this may be referred the U. Merodabensis of Von 

 deiii Busch in Kuster's monograph of Unio (ed. Chemn. U. 

 pi. 78, f. 4). Perhaps, too, the U. Rajahensis of Lea (Obs. 

 Un. vol. 3, p. 77, pi- 23, f. 53), which has been vainly sought 

 for in the Rajah's Tank near Calcutta, its recorded locality, may 

 prove, if indigenous, a distorted form of this or someallied species. 



"> J. Asi. Soc. Beng. 1873, pt. 2, p. 208, pl.l7,-f. 3. 



