134 Bulletin American Museum of Natural History [Vol. LIII 
Bulinus by Herrmansen (1846, “Index Gen. Malac.,’ I, p. 140). Miiller’s 
fourth species was Bulinus senegalensis defined by a reference to Adan- 
son, 1757, ‘Hist. Nat. Sénégal, Hist. des Coquillages,’ p. 5, Pl. 1. He 
also states that ‘“‘Adanson erfand thr einen neuen Geschlechtsnamen 
(Bulinus).’’ Obviously, therefore, Adanson’s Bulinus becomes type of 
Bulinus by absolute tautonymy.! Otherwise the name Bulinus Miiller, 
1781, would supersede Physa Draparnaud, 1801. 
The status of Bulinus Miller has been discussed by von Martens,? 
who accepted Physa fontinalis as its type, but refused to substitute 
Bulinus for Physa. Later, Dall® went over the ground, reaching a con- 
clusion which we accept without reserve. Finally, Kennard and Wood- 
ward? considered the question, concluding that Miiller’s “adoption of 
Adanson’s name (Bulinus) involves the acceptance of his shell as the 
type of the genus. Since, however, that is indeterminate, this post- 
Linnean revival of the name is rendered nugatory. But for that, 
Bulinus Miller would have precedence of Physa Draparnaud, 1801.” 
This conclusion seems to us incorrect in at least two statements. 
Adanson’s species has been determined. It was defined very well, and, 
with specimens from the type locality, no competent zodlogist would go 
astray in its identification. Its acceptance does not displace Physa, 
but, on the contrary, if it were to be thrown out as indeterminate, then 
Bulinus would take the place of Physa having Physa fontinalis as type. 
The International Rules expressly exclude indeterminate species from 
consideration in the selection of genotypes. 
Bulinus came into general use for the group under consideration 
and is to be found in the most widely used systematic works on general 
conchology, such as H. and A. Adams, ‘Genera of Recent Mollusca’; 
Tryon, ‘Structural and Systematic Conchology’; Fischer, ‘Manuel de 
Conchyliologie’ and others. 
The new name (or amended spelling) Bullinus originated with Oken, 
1815, and in recent years has been taken up by several authors. Oken’s 
work was a mere compilation from Miller; only the same species were 
mentioned. The revival of Oken’s name for the group was apparently 
due to the fact that Adanson, being pre-Linnean, could not properly be 
quoted for the genus, and to ignorance of the prior work of Miller. 
Bullinus Oken has no status in nomenclature according to the Rules of 
Biase ESAT Uae WLR ASS 5 GR Sg VK i ta es 
'This conclusion is based upon the International Code of zoological nomenclature, Art. 30d, and 
Opinions 16 and 18 
( Lee8; 10: P. and F. Sarasin, ‘Materialien z. Naturg. Insel Celebes, Die Sit -Moll.,’ 
31905, ‘Harriman Alaska Exped., Land and Fresh-water Moll.,’ p. 105 ee 
41920, Proc. Malacol. Soc. London, XIV, pp. 86-88. 
