CONCHOLOGIA INDICA. 
45 
2. M, tigrina, var. Hutton. 
W. Himalayah. 
3. M. pyramis, Benson, J. Asi. Soc. Beng. vol. 5 
(1836), name for the Melania species B, in the 
Glean. Science Calcutta, vol. 2 (1830), p. 22. 
River Goomty. 
The shell figured is from the collection of Benson. 
We presume not to assert that it is distinct from either 
tuberculata or tigrina, but it is important to indicate the 
exact type. 
4. M. pyramis, var. — M. adspersa, Troschel, Wiegm. 
Archiv. Naturg. 1837, p. 175, probably. 
Shan States. 
The M. adspersa of Philippi (Abbild. N. Conch, 
vol. 3, p. 58, Melan. pi. 5, f. 5, 6) said by Brot to be 
identical with the M. fiammigera of the same work 
(Melan. pi. 3, f. 11) does not equally suit our variable 
species. Whether Philippi’s specimens come from the 
Ganges, as stated, may well be doubted. 
5. M. Hanleyi, Godwin- Austen, Proc. Zool. Soc. 
1872, p. 514, pi. 30, f. 2 (as Melanoides). 
Diyung River, Cachar Hills. 
Allied to the next, but the prickles are much more 
numerous. 
6. M. Menkiana, Lea, Obs. Unio, vol. 4, p. 24, for 
M. plicata, Lea, Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc. (and Obs. 
Unio, vol. 2, p. 20), pi. 23, f. 95 (not of Menke, 
Synops. 1830). 
Khersasip, N. Cachar. 
This rare shell may be easily distinguished from the 
spinous forms of variabilis by the absence of those 
coarse sulci which gird the base of the latter. It is not 
the plicata of Reeve’s figure, although two of the three 
specimens in Cuming’s collection are certainly Indian, 
and not as stated from New Granada. It should be 
noticed that Lea’s figure was taken from a large 
specimen with a cut-down lip, but all doubt as to its 
identity is removed by the description. The M. spinosa 
of Benson in Hanley’s Conchological Miscellany (Mel. 
pi. 1, f. 7) should rather have been referred to this 
than to variabilis. 
7 M. seabra ? var. spinulosa. 
Ceylon. 
The shells represented in our figures 7 and 10, are 
both called (but not described as) M. spinulosa by 
Indian conchologists ; yet neither can be positively 
affiliated to the Lamarckian species from Timor de- 
lineated in Delessert’s folio. 
8, 9. M. jugieostis, Benson’s MS. 
Tenasserim River. 
10. M. aeanthica of Dohrn, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1858, as 
of Lea (Proc. Zool. Soc. 1850, p. 194). 
Ceylon. 
The identity of this Melania (named from Dohrn’s 
type, now in the British Museum) with Lea’s species 
from the Philippine Islands, may possibly be questioned. 
PLATE CXI. 
HELIX. 
See previous plates xiii to xvi, xxv to xxxii, 1 to 
lxiv, lxxxiii to xc. 
1. H. Skinneri, Reeve, Conch. Icon. Helix, f. 
1387. — Pfeif. Mon. Helic. vol. 4, p. 219. 
Ceylon. 
2, 3. H. undosa, var. Blanford, J. Asi. Soc. Beng. 
1865 (vol. 34), p. 68 : Cont. Mai. pt. 5 (as 
Nanina). 
Shan Hills E. of Ava. 
The original types (which we had not seen) were 
much more shagreened, and less wrinkled than this 
specimen. 
4. 7. H. ganoma, Pfeiffer, Proc.' Zool. Soc. 1853, 
p. 124: Mon. Helic. vol. 4, p. 22. — Reeve, Conch. 
Icon. Helix, f. 1267.— II. Juliana, Pfeif. in Ivust. 
ed. Chem. Helix, pi. 33, f. 15. 
Ceylon. 
Very near the common and variable Juliana of Gray 
(rosacea of Sowerby’s description in Beechey) to 
which Pfeiffer preferentially refers the Dufourei of 
Grateloup (changed from citrinoides, Grat.) in the 
Act. Lin. Bordeaux, vol. 11, p. 407, pi. 1, f. 2. 
5. H. bajadera, Pfeiffer, Mon. Helic. vol. 3, p. 52; 
vol. 4, p. 250. — Reeve, Conch. Icon. Helix, f. 388. 
Bengal. 
6. H. intumeseens, Blanford, J. Asi. Soc. Beng. 
1866 (vol. 36), p. 33: Cont. Mai. pt. 6 (as Nanina, 
section Ariophanta). — Pfeif. Mon. Helic. vol. 5, p. 
321. 
Mahableshwar, W. Ghats of Hindostan. 
