44 
m L. soós 
language, 1 2 to which I also added a short resumé in the German lan¬ 
guage. — Hesse is of the opinion that the characteristics adduced by 
me, i. e. the characteristics of the radula and the jaw do not form 
a basis sufficiently strong for taking out C. coerulans from the sub¬ 
family Campylaeinae. As a ground for his objection Hesse refers to 
the fact that species possessing smooth (aulacognath) jaw, and a radula 
provided with aberrant teeth also occur among the Murellae. 
I consider that the objections given by Hesse are not sufficiently 
weighty to justify me in changing my point of view. The jaw of 
H. coerulans is not a simple oxygnath jaw, but it represents a quite 
peculiar type of jaw, since it consists of two smooth plates instead of 
one as I have described above, and therefore in this respect the 
H. coerulans differs from all the Helicidae known up to the present, 
the variations on the contrary which are to be found in the jaw of 
the Murellae are always less significant, because however I regard the 
figures given by Hesse and Wiegmann 2 I can not find one among them 
which differs even approximately to such a degree from the species 
with odontognath jaw as does H. coerulans from the Campylaeae, and 
for instance as Hesse writes the ribs of the jaw of the Murellae have 
a tendency to be flatter, while on the jaw of the specimens of Setubal 
«the 3—4 ribs were found to have become flattened and to have almost 
disappeared», 3 i. e. transitions are to be found between the oxygnath 
and the smooth (aulacognath) jaws. 
Still less convincing do I consider the second objection of Hesse 
which is based upon the fact that some species of Mur ella also have 
aberrant teeth. The teeth of the Murellae exhibit variability from the 
point of view that the teeth are shorter or at the most of the same 
length as the basal plate, but those of the aulacognath forms are con- 
siderabely longer. — Here again therefore we see a variability having- 
such a systematical value as we have seen above in the case of the 
jaw. On the contrary H. coerulans has teeth which are not connected 
by transitions with those of the Campylaeae. The valuation of the cha¬ 
racteristics is naturally a matter of individual conviction, but I am of 
opinion that the characteristics adduced above are in any case quite 
sufficient to justify the separation of Hazaya from Campy-Idea * 
It is true, as I have also emphasised, that the construction of 
1 A Campylæa coerulans anatómiája és rendszertani helye. (Állattani Közle¬ 
mények, VII, 1908, p. 21 — 25.) 
2 .Rossmässler’s Iconographie, N. F. XIV. Bd., 1908. 
3 Ibid., p. 31. 
