462 
The Ohio Naturalist. 
[Vol. VI, No. 4, 
NOTE ON LIST OF OHIO MOLLUSCA, AND A SUGGESTION 
IN REGARD TO LOCAL FAUNAL LISTS. 
V. Sterki. 
A preliminary list of the Land and Fresh Water Mollusca of 
Ohio has been ]>repared by the writer and deposited in the 
Academy lil)rary. It is an abstract of a larger hand list, and 
contains nearly all the species seen from the State, or recorded, 
except some of Pleurocera and Gonioleasis which still must be 
worked up specially. A few species listed must be verified as to 
actual occurrence in the State, a few others as to exact identifi- 
cation, and there is no doubt that quite a number of additional 
ones will be found. 
As stated elsewhere, I believe that “the Mollusca are the 
truest exponents of the geographical distribution of animals in a 
given region or district,” and also that Ohio is a specially inter- 
esting territory in that respect. i\nd therefore, a faunal list 
should not be published before the species, varieties and local 
forms from all parts of the State are fairly well known and their 
distribution can be shown by tables, charts, etc., approximate!}^ 
accurate, even if it take a few years’ more work. Then, and 
only then, such a publication will be to the credit of the Academy 
and the State. 
If a part of a research fund could be turned over to the 
collecting and working up of our Mollusca, for a year or two, it 
would help considerably, and also might make it possible to 
work up a special “Ohio Collection” containing the species and 
local forms from various parts of the State, carefully identified, 
to be deposited with some institution, e. g., the Ohio State Uni- 
versity. 
Local lists, also, might be worked up, of various parts of 
Ohio, where zoologists are studying the faunas. And in this 
connection a suggestion may be excused. Such a list, be it of 
Mollusca, or any other group of animals, or comprehensive, 
should not be confined to a county, except where the same is 
bounded by natural lines. Political outlines have nothing to do 
with the natural features of the county, but go across hills, valleys, 
rivers, etc. It is better to take u]> a certain naturally limited 
territory, a valley, a drainage system, a range or group of mount-' 
ains or hills, regardless of county lines. 
The same might be said of States, to a large extent. Yet, 
they comprise much larger territories, and for practical and 
routine reasons, will be considered separately, in general. Ohio 
is more naturally confined than most other States, and a faunal 
list of the State means somewhat of a unity. But even then, 
the lines should not be drawn too strictly. 
