266 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. XIII, July 1959 
fig. 2); ML 41, NH 5, Espiritu Santo (F), 
Vate (F) 
Contis magus decurtatns Dautzenberg { = adan- 
soni Sowerby, non Lamarck) Sowerby, 
Thes. Conch., Ill: pL 199, figs. 286-289; 
NH 4, NH 9, NH 12, NH 14 
Conus magus striolatus Kiener Kiener, Conus, 
pi. 105, fig. 1; NH 13 
Conus marmoreus Linne Kira (1955: pL 36, 
fig. 6): NH 4, NH 12, NH 14, Espiritu 
Santo (F), Vate (F) 
Conus miles Linne Vate (F) 
Conus omaria Bruguike Espiritu Santo (F) 
Conus pulicarius^mguihTQ Kira (1955: pL 36, 
fig. 15); NH 4, NH 12, Cape Lisburn, 
Espiritu Santo (H), New Hebrides (F) 
Conus rattus Bruguiere Kiener, Conus, pi. 44, 
fig. 3; ML 41, NH 8, NH 14 
Conus senator Linne Vate (F) 
Conus striatus Linne Kiener, Conus, pi. 47, 
figs. 1, la; NH 4, Erromanga (Hedley) 
Conus tessellatus Born Man. Conch., (1)6: 
pi. 2, figs. 26, 27; New Hebrides (Hedley) 
Conus textile \dm.n€ Aneiteum (Bennett, I860) 
Conus tulip a Linne Kira (1955: pi. 37, fig. 
19); Segond Channel, Espiritu Santo 
(MCZ), Espiritu Santo (CNHM), Erro- 
manga (Hedley) 
Conus vautieri Kiener Espiritu Santo (F) 
Family TEREBRIDAE 
Terebra chlorata Lamarck Hirase and Taki 
(1951: pi. 116, hg. 8); NH 13 
Terebra cingulifera Lamarck Nguna (F) 
Terebra dimidiatalAnn€ Nguna (F), Vate (F), 
Erromanga (Hedley), Aneiteum (Hedley) 
Terebra felina Dillwyn { = tigrina Gmelin) 
Man. Conch., (1)7: pi. 1, fig. 11; New 
Hebrides (Hedley) 
Terebra maculata Linne Kira (1955: pi. 38, 
hg. 21); NH 15, Nguna (F) 
Terebra striata Quoy and Gaimard ( = ajfinis 
Gray) Man. Conch., (1)7: pi. 2, hgs. 18, 
22; New Hebrides (Hedley) 
Terebra strigilata lAnni Man. Conch., (1)7: 
pi. 10, hgs. 84, 85; Cape Lisburn, Espiritu 
Santo (H) 
Terebra subulata Lamarck Vanua Lava (F) 
DISCUSSION 
The 409 species and varieties named above 
are not presumed to form a complete list of 
the fauna. The Hadheld collection of shells 
from Lifu in the Loyalty group contained 860 
species, and subsequent research has added 
many more to that number. There are eight 
turrids known from the New Hebrides and 
196 from New Caledonia. The 22 Mitridae 
listed here are only a fraction of the 151 re- 
ported from New Caledonia, and similar com- 
parisons can be made for nearly every family. 
Since I have prepared a similar checklist of 
the Solomon Islands marine shells (Solem, 
1953, 1958), a tabular comparison of the 
known faunas might be instructive. From 
Table 1 it can be seen that only a little more 
than one half of the New Hebridean species 
have been reported from the Solomons, and 
that more than one half of the Solomon 
Islands species are not yet known from the 
New Hebrides. This is the result of inade- 
quate collecting in both areas and does not 
indicate any great faunal difference between 
the two areas. It is quite possible that many 
Indonesian species reach the Solomons and 
not the New Hebrides, but almost all of the 
species listed in these papers are distributed 
extensively throughout most of the Indo- 
Pacific region. Their presence in the Solomons 
and New Hebrides is to be expected, but the 
scanty literature dealing with the marine 
TABLE 1 
Comparison of Known Marine Mollusks of 
Solomon Islands and New Hebrides Islands 
SPECIES 
GROUP 
Common 
In New 
In 
to 
Hebrides 
Solomons 
both 
only 
only 
Bivalves 
36 
61 
65 
Prosobranchs. . . 
183 
121 
245 
Others 
4 
4 
4 
Totals 
223 
186 
320 
