30 
CONCHOLOGIA INDICA. 
5, 6. S. crassiuscula, Benson’s Mss. in Pfeif. Mon. 
Helic. vol. 3, p. 9. 
B undelkhund : Punj aub. 
7. S. acuminata, Blanford, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1869, 
p. 449. 
Momein in Yunan. 
8, 9. S. collina, Blanford, Mss. 
Mahabaleshwar. 
10. S. collina, var. 
PLATE LXIX. 
LIMNJEA. 
1, 4. L. rufescens, Gray, in Sowerby’s Genera 
Shells, pt. 7, Limn. f. 2, and Reeve, Conch. System, 
pi. 191, f. 2.—L. chlamys, Benson, in part. 
Ganges, &c., &c. 
The name is infelicitous, because the reddish tint is 
rather abnormal than otherwise : it has however a long 
priority of date. Hereafter links may be discovered 
to unite the species with the still earlier-named acu¬ 
minata. We suspect that eventually all the Indian 
forms (those of the Germanic region excepted) will be 
referred to acuminata, luteola, and ovalis. 
2, 3. L. rufescens, var. patula. 
Ganges. 
Apparently the L. patula of Troschel in Wiegmann’s 
Archives for 1837 (vol. 3, p. 167). 
5, 6. L. chlamys, Benson, Journ. Asi. Soc. Beng. 
1836, vol. 5, p. 744. 
Moradabad, Benares, &c. 
Runs into rufescens, which was apparently co¬ 
extensive as a Bensonian species. Yet as the links 
have not been obtained by us, this extreme form 
(from Benson’s collection) may for convenience sake 
retain his appellation. 
7, 10. L. amygdalus, Troschel, Wiegm. Archiv. 1837, 
vol. 3, p. 168.—Kuster, ed. Chemn. Lim. p. 35, 
pi. 6, f. 15, 16. 
Ganges. 
Perhaps only a variety of rufescens, but the sutural 
line is not so oblique, and the colour differs. 
8, 9. L. acuminata, Lamarck, Anim. s. Yert. vol. 6, 
pt. 2, p. 160.—Deles. Rec. Coq. Lam. pi. 30, f. 6. 
30 miles S.E. of Hingola, &c. 
Lamarck’s Bengal specimens were probably rufescens, 
but the shape of the individual delineated from his 
cabinet accords better with that which we have 
figured. 
PLATE LXX. 
LIMN2EA. 
1. L. rufescens, Gray, var. 
Some regard this abnormal form as the L. pectinoides 
of Kuster’s monograph. 
2, 3. L. ovalis, Gray, in Sow. Gen. Shells, pt. 7, 
Limn. f. 4, Reeve, Conch. Syst. pi. 191, f. 4. 
Calcutta; Almorah. 
4. L. ovalis, Gray, var. strigata. 
J ounpore. 
Has the aspect of L. cerasum of Troschel. 
5, 6. L. luteola, Lamarck, Anim. s. Yert. vol. 6, pt. 2, 
p. 160.—Deles. Rec. Coq. Lam. pi. 30, f. 5. 
Bengal, &c., &c. 
This and rufescens seem diffused throughout India 
7. 10. L. pinguis, Dohrn, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1858, 
p. 134. 
Ceylon. 
8. L. pinguis, Dohrn, var. 
Calcutta. 
Benson’s types of his L. bulla (misprinted butta), a 
mere name for the almost undescribed L. limosa ? of 
Hutton (J. Asi. Soc. Beng. vol. 3, 1834) chiefly belong 
to this form. The L. bulla of Kuster (ed. Chemn.) is 
more like the European ovata (peregra var. ovata). 
Our specimen almost unites pinguis with luteola. 
9. L. rufescens, Gray, var. Sylhetica. 
Marshes in Sylhet. 
A rare form delineated from Benson’s original type 
of the Sylhet variety of his chlamys. 
PLATE LXXI. 
MELANIA. 
1. M. Iravadica, Blanford, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1869, 
p. 445. 
Upper Irawady at Male and Bhamo. 
2, 3. M. Broti, Dohrn, in Reeve’s Conch. Icon. 
Mel. f. 160.—M. chocolatum, Brot, Revue Zool. 
1860, June, pi. 16, f. 2. 
Ceylon. 
