fer btn, psoas sy! oie ae eke hl pepreatege - tee : Sitar ; ee fi : ane} ie Pert i eee. : ep seaimae of ere - Ae rae : ’ os Pies Soe bin So = Ane eee Be ITT we ES SMT ee eet, are iat LES es ea peed on i Sosa cee Sitter eh re se nto re pve NE oe Le [oma oe Pa J ate Ree naxaanpan rat boven core cae bee Reo Sore ete : Pa = Saree rie Me EEE ON we eran Ne va: Ah, eta ae ve hye Hetty te : Nees = : coi Se see a) Sees cen at paetors pena “te Pt de SS Paps on pres Fg et AY ae —t Ayre A ~ en ~ ae es Satoh a CP any i) ae 1) Ome jee sis ae aoe =, ay pe Bl ae ele Neves Pe f e. Wf re" "4 trontispiece to Ann. & Mag Nat. Hist, § 2. ‘Hicks. §cu bp: Vol 19. 1 & THE ANNALS AND MAGAZINE OF NATURAL HISTORY, INCLUDING ZOOLOGY, BOTANY, ann GEOLOGY. (BEING A CONTINUATION OF THE ‘ANNALS’ COMBINED WITH LOUDON AND CHARLESWORTH'’S ‘MAGAZINE OF NATURAL HISTORY.) CONDUCTED BY PRIDEAUX JOHN SELBY, Ese., F.L.S., CHARLES C, BABINGTON, KEsq., M.A., F.B.S., F.LS., F.G.S., J. H. BALFOUR, M.D., Prof. Bot. Edinburgh, | AND RICHARD TAYLOR, F.L.S., F.G.S. VOL. XIX.—SECOND SERIES. wyvee LONDON: PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY TAYLOR AND FRANCIS. SOLD BY LONGMAN, BROWN, GREEN, LONGMANS, AND ROBERTS; SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO.; PIPER AND CO., BAILLIERE, REGENT STREET, AND PARIS: LIZARS, AND MACLACHLAN AND STEWART, EDINBURGH - HODGES AND SMITH, DUBLIN: AND ASHER, BERLIN. 1857. ‘*Omnes res create sunt divine sapientie et potentie testes, divitie felicitatis humane :—ex harum usu bonitas Creatoris; ex pulchritudine sapientia Domini; ex ceconomia in conservatione, proportione, renovatione, potentia majestatis elucet. Earum itaque indagatio ab hominibus sibi relictis semper estimata; a veré eruditis et sapientibus semper exculta; malé doctis et barbaris semper inimica fuit.”— LINNZUS. “ Quelque soit le principe de la vie animale, il ne faut qu’ouvrir les yeux pour voir qu'elle est le chef-d’ceuvre de la Toute-puissance, et le but auquel se rapportent Loutes ses opérations.”—BRUCKNER, Théorie du Syst?éme Animal, Leyden, 1767. oo + se eo eo 6 ee 6 2NE Sylvan powers Obey our summons ; from their deepest dells The Dryads come, and throw their garlands wild And odorous branches at our feet ; the Nymphs That press with nimble step the mountain thyme And purple heath-flower come not empty-handed, But scatter round ten thousand forms minute Of velvet moss or lichen, torn from rock Or rifted oak or cavern deep: the Naiads too Quit their loved native stream, from whose smooth face They crop the lily, and each sedge and rush That drinks the rippling tide: the frozen poles, Where peril waits the bold adventurer’s tread, The burning sands of Borneo and Cayenne, All, all to us unlock their secret stores And pay their cheerful tribute. J. TAYLOR, Norwich, 1818. ALERE Y FLAMMAM. CONTENTS OF VOL. XIX. [SECOND SERIES.] NUMBER CIX. I. Notes of an Excursion to the Pyrenees in search of Diatomacez. By WixuiaM Smrru, F.L.S., Professor of Natural History, Queen’s College; Cork. ‘(With two Plates.) ...i voces cccadabsliescceecess obs veeyer II. On the Development of the Root-cell and its Nucleus in Chara verticillata (Roxb.). By H. J. Carrer, Esq., Assistant Surgeon F.C.8., Mombayi! CWith @ Plates) .cocsecne sarod cionddannsencenshsocattess III. On two species of Echinodermata new to the Fauna of Great Britain. By L. Barrert, F.G.S. (With a Plate.) TV. Notes on the Permian System of the Counties of Durham and Northumberland. By RrcHarp Howser, Esq. (With a Plate.) - VY. Notes on the genus Quenstedtia. By Joun Lycert, Esq. ... VI. On the Uses of the Sand-canal in the Starfishes. By Tuomas Wiuurams, M.D., F.L.S., Physician to the Swansea Infirmary ...... VII. Remarks on the Inferior Oolite and Lias in parts of North- amptonshire, compared with the same Formations in Gloucestershire. By the Rev. P. B. Bropix, M.A., F.G.S.° .....0000.. do's tbcixetsuvessiiee VIII. Contributions to the knowledge of the Anatomy of Nautilus Pompilius, L., especially with reference to the male animal. By J. VAN DER Hoeven, M.D., &c., Professor of Zoology in the Uni- versity of Leyden. (With two: Plates.) ...ccc.ccccscsseseerssessceccecovess New Books :—Shells and their Inhabitants: The Genera of Recent Mollusca; arranged according to their Organization, by Henry ~ and Arthur Adams.— Das Gebiss der Schnecken, zur Begriindung einer natiirlichen Classification, untersucht von Dr. F. H. Tros- chel, Professor an der Universitat zu Bonn. — Prodromus Sy- stematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis; Auctore Alphonso de Page } 13 32 33 53 55 56 58 Candolle POO r eee e eres eer teneseeeseeeeeeesereeetesD OC r eet ewesaeseseneseeee 74—85 Proceedings of the Zoological Society ...ccesccceccsseeseeseneneeeseees 85--102 iv _ CONTENTS. Portrait of Dr. Johnston; On the Occurrence of some new species of Pollicipes in the Inferior Oolite and Lias of Gloucestershire, by Page . the Rey. P. B. Brodie, M.A., F.G.S.; Mr. Yarrell’s Collections ; . On the Stereognathus Ooliticus from the Stonesfield Slate, by Prof. Owen, F.R.S., F.G.S.; Note on Estheria minuta, by T. Rupert Jones, Assist. Sec. G.S.; On the genus Cuma, by C. Spence Bate, F.L.S.; Rare British Birds, by W. P. Cocks; Note on Zootoca vivipara var. nigra, by Dr. J. E. Gray; On a new Turkey, Mele- agris mexicana, by J. Gould, F.R.S.; Description of anew Trogon and a new Odontophorus, by J. Gould, F.R.S.; Meteorological Observations and Table ........secsseeeees dia deetanek vies aue koeepiebs 102—11]2 NUMBER CX. IX. On the Organization of the Infusoria, especially the Vorticelle. X. New British Lichens. By the Rev. W. A. Leicuron, B.A., F.B.S.E. (With a Plate.) ssc biped ccsees Le igen oaa ee XI. On the so-called ‘“ Water-vascular System.” By Tuomas Wiuuiams, M.D., F.L.S., Physician to the Swansea Infirmary ...... XII. A Synopsis of the British Edriophthalmous Crustacea. Part I. Amphipoda. By C. Spence BATE, F.L.S. &e. cisescceeseenee hereditres XIII. List of Coleoptera received from Old Calabar, on the West Coast of Africa. PartI. By ANprew Murray, Edinburgh......... XIV. Researches on the Development of the Myriapoda. By M. BABB Recs. cvisoesecienh ncceegumecinheegieains sire yk Cis see a8 see CSG ls cg was on New Books :—Elementary Course of Geology, Mineralogy, and Phy- sical Geography, by Prof. D. T. Ansted, M.A., F.R.S. &e. ...... 162 166 Proceedings of the Zoological Society ; Geological Society ...... 168—187 Observations on the Organization and Reproduction of the Volvocinee, by F. Cohn; List of Pheenogamous Plants collected by Dr. E. K. Kane on the Western Coast of Greenland; Remarks on young Bony Pikes (Lepidosteus), by Prof. Agassiz; Meteorological Observations and Table ...ccccsecccesesecceceoe éudtavakoes mkna oie 187—192 NUMBER CXI. XV. On the Mechanism of Aquatic Respiration and on the Struc- ture of the Organs of Breathing in Invertebrated Animals. By Tuo. mas WiutiaMs, M.D., F.L.S. (With a Plate.) ..cssccccsscceseeeeseees CONTENTS. v Page XVI. Characters of Streptaulus, a new genus, and of several species of the Cyclostomacea from Sikkim, the Khasia Hills, Ava, and Pegu. By_W. H. Benson, Bags: oicsiiieis. fos cecseeseus patil dT, oth wveie 201 XVII. Notice of a marked variety of Patella vulgata (proposed to be named var. intermedia), found in Guernsey and Jersey. By ANDREW MURRAY, Edimburgh .........cscescecedeeteccecscseetens sosescese SIL XVIII. On the Structure of the Shell of Rhynchonella Geinitziana. By WiuuiaM B. Carpenter, M.D., F.RAS.........ccccceseseseesscetecees 214 XIX. On the Organization of the Infusoria, especially the Vorti- ee ee BIA, Ws MAAC veciasccscasanpatscaeade vis capstceoscee 215 XX. Descriptions of new Ceylon Coleoptera. By Joun NIETNER, Colombo, Ceylon’ 00. ii cls eceeeveonse NASA! Brie ys oot) Pe ee fee 241 Proceedings of the Royal Society; Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society; Zoological Society ...cecscsesesesessceeseeees 249—268 New Localities for rare Plants and Zoophytes, by Margaret Gatty ; On the supposed new British species of Skenea, by W. Webster ; On the Influence of Moisture upon the Direction of Roots, by P. Duchartre; On the Migration of the Starling, by James Har- ley; British Amphipoda, by C. Spence Bate; Descriptions of some new species of Tanagers, by Philip Lutley Sclater, M.A., P.Z.S. &e....000 OE ere et heghh da Ciasah abehranesa tdi Mais shs 268—272 NUMBER CXIL XXI. Description of some Foraminifera from the Coast of Norway. By W. K. Parxer and T. Rupert Jones, F.G.S. (With two Plates.) 273 XXII. Notes on the Permian System of the Counties of Durham and Northumberland. By RicHarp Howsks, Esq. ..........c.csceeeeee 304 XXIII. List of Coleoptera received from Old Calabar, on the West Coast of Africa. By ANDREW Murray, Edinburgh. (With a Plate.) 313 XXIV. On new species of Bulimus from India, Burma, and the Mauritius. By W.H. BENSON, Esq. .occcec.ssseccssecccccecccesevecscscnce 327 XXV. On the Anatomy of the Rhinanthacee, considered in its relations with the Classification of these Plants. By A. CuHatTin... 331 Proceedings of the Zoological Society ; Botanical Society of Edin- DUMB al ee SUUTENDA tas Pace Us acVeed Saco deh Sb ye ING aU. 333—346 Observations on the Pteropus or Flying Fox of Australia, by J. K. E. Fairholme ; On the Metamorphoses of Trachys pygmea, by M. vi CONTENTS. Page Leprieur ; On a Monstrosity of Haliotis (albicans ?), by Dr. J. E. Gray; On the Perforated Structure of Rhynchonella Geinitzi- ana, by William. King; On the Nucleus of the Operculum of Cyclostoma elegans, by Dr. J. E. Gray; On Object-slides of Canary Glass, by Prof. Ernst Briicke; On two new species of Humming Birds belonging to the genus Amazilius, by J. Gould, FEE. ci ics Wirsbivacdcddabibassacaycshenkseesdeeamaa pemevEneastabs 346—352 NUMBER CXIII. XXVI. Researches on the Development of the Pectinibranchiata. By J. Koren and D. C. DANIELSSEN. (With two Plates.) ......... 353 XXVII. A Revision of the Genera of some of the Families of Con- ‘ chifera or Bivalve Shells. Part III. Arcade. By Joun Epwarp Gray;:Ph.D., F.R.S., FUS.. 8.) svietds isccessnevaes eg eaagiente -. 366 XXVIII. On a new species of Paaitictese bee By ARTHUR Apams}; SiR Nis B.L:S:.: Ses isaac, 0d stspsttuesl Ze, ieediesbhss Rakasereenes 373 XXIX. Descriptions of new Ceylon Coleoptera. By JoHn Niev- NER, Colombo, Ceylon ...ccocscresescecseccecsens La vigcadsnapnhy Vane Shun aaceeae 374 XXX. Note on a Nematoid Worm, parasitic upon Termites. By C. LESPES ...eeeseseevnes sks ancl Leigh « gaviouahwalbeh # daike usa issinte-cneean heme 388 XXXI. Brief Description of a Ctenostomatous Polyzoon, allied to Vesicularia, occurring on the Australian Coast. By Joun Dents MAcDONALD, Assistant Surgeon R.N. .......scssccecseseccesvessevcsuenss 390 XXXII. Anatomical Description of a species of Keio Polypes, probably forming the type of a new genus of Alcyonide. By JoHN Dents Macpona.p, Assistant Surgeon R.N. ........ Sheba booeds abonged 391 New Books :—Dr. Jacob Sturm’s Deutschlands Flora in Abbildungen nach der Natur mit Beschreibungen. Fortgesetzt von Dr. J. W. Sturm.—Iconographia Familiarum Naturalium Regni Vegetabilis delineata atque adjectis Familiarum characteribus, &c. ornata. Anctore A. Schnizlein} Dry Phiisiioas cis ciphaveh Wesabe 392, 393 Proceedings of the Royal Society ; Zoological Society; Botanical Society of Edinburgh; Geological Society ....-+essesseeees 393—428 Observations on the Generation of the Arachnida, by E. Blanchard ;. On the Brain of the Dyfici in its relations to Locomotion, by E. Faivre ; On Spiochetopterus, a new genus of Annelides from the coast of Norway, by M. Sars; On the Sea Saw-dust of the Pacific, by John Denis Macdonald ; Obituary Notice—Dr. Robert Ball Of Dablin ccccccccccevscessccnsscncseves cgeberdseavestssavesees. 428—432 CONTENTS. vii NUMBER CXIV. XXXIII. Researches on the Development of the Pectinibranchiata. By J. Koren and D. C. DANIELSSEN .1......ssceccevescceccevercecscsees 433 _ XXXIV. List of Coleoptera received from Old Calabar, on the West Coast of Africa. By ANDREW Murray, Edinburgh. (With PNET WAG AT Ue UL eck eeda ya chap avecs kedn ass de ubenesiavad debvnenssobcavesnnesrecses 443 XXXV. Descriptions of two new species of iaiaehe onsen Mollusca. BPP MTOR ADAMS, BURGCO TIN. occ ciiccssccccssevcaneascdscsosseaces 461 XXXVI. Notes on the Permian System of the Counties of Durham and Northumberland. By Ricuarp Howss, Esq. ......ssesssceeseeees 463 XXXVII. Notes on Sepia biserialis and Sepia elegans. By Josuua UMP CUNY bie ecacevdanaued can esesdokabeen sds spin sevieeseNe tice ats less on obds 474 XXXVIII. On some Mites and their young states. By A. ScHEv- MPIRDE a (1 WeRUAN WINNIE UGS has BUG EU os die AUS LGG 5d Sa NES atic nds eb asiriisca eon ded 475 New Books :—Manual of the Botany of the Northern United States, by Asa Gray, Professor of Natural History in Harvard University. —A Dictionary of Botanical Terms, by the Rev. J. S. Henslow, M.A., Professor of Botany in the University of Cambridge.— The British Botanist’s Field-book: a Synopsis of the British Flowering Plants, by A. P. Childs, F.R.C.S. .......sccsesseeee 479—482 Proceedings of the Zoological Society ........sesessssessccseeverees 482—494 Note on the Anatomy and Physiology of the Pulmoniferous Mollusca, by Dr. C. Semper; Note on the Invertebrate Fauna of the Baltic Sea, by G. Lindstroém; The Blacks of Moreton Bay and the Porpoises, by J. K. E. Fairholme; On Eolis Landsburgii, by MeN Des che lal pnocliverpaddeciwesesaversices nes Raskin sees 495—498 PLATES IN VOL, XIX, FRONTISPIECE.—Portrait of Dr. Johnston. Pee } New Diatomacez. III. Development of Chara verticillata. TV. Fossils from the Permian System of Durham and Northumber- land. Vr fAnatomy of Nautilus Pompilius. VII. New Echinodermata. VIII. New British Lichens. TX. Organization of Infusoria. Xi } Foraminifera from the Coast of Norway. XII} Coleoptera from Old Calabar. XIV. Mites and their larval states. XV. Mechanism of Aquatic Respiration in the Cephalopods. ATK }Development of Pectinibranchiata, ; 8 Ci oie ie § i : a S ANT 4 ~~ - Ann & Mag. Nat Hist. Vol.19. PLI Kaiti Tee COO Si HT 5 (CUTER RP See ET EN) wm tf # nits hk Aree (ABE ae 9 * 800 dia. SecanMA Eee cr im —————— — —————— EE Se aa aes wera A I —A-A BS ory ee : 2 4 Pin EM X4O0O0 dia x OO dia. ma — 4 a Ty ae AISI ASAD ATX YD 2 ea nts bisa m ee a ae -~ ie CD DO IIS OS ‘xX 800 dia. J.De C.Sowerby se C.Coppock. ad nat. del. THE ANNALS MAGAZINE OF NATURAL HISTORY. [SECOND SERIES.] Se es sedbapeneeeedbes per litora spargite muscum, Naiades, et circdm vitreos considite fontes : Pollice virgineo teneros hic carpite flores : Floribus et pictum, divz, replete canistrum. At vos, o Nymphe Craterides, ite sub undas ; Ite, recurvato variata corallia trunco Vellite muscosis e rupibus, et mihi conchas Ferte, Dez pelagi, et pingui conchylia succo.” N. Parthenii Giannettasti Ec\, 1. No. 109. JANUARY 1857. I.—Notes of an Excursion to the Pyrenees in search of Diato- macee. By Wiiiiam Smiru, F.L.S., Professor of Natural History, Queen’s College, Cork. [With two Plates. | IN the ‘Annals’ for January 1855, I had the opportunity of recording the results of a former excursion to the South of France and the Auvergne: the same object, namely to collect facts regarding the distribution of Diatomaceous forms, was the main purpose of the journey whose outline I now lay before the public. : My views on the present occasion were directed to the western shores of France, and the lofty range of granitic mountains which forms its southern boundary; and from the widely differ- ent influences affecting the flora of the Bay of Biscay and the Pyrenees, I anticipated results that would contrast, to some extent, with those furnished by the shores of the Mediterranean and the volcanic slopes of Mont Dore and the Puy de Déme. My route was as follows :— I crossed from Southampton to Havre on the 14th June 1856, and spent a few days in exploring the mouth of the Seine and the neighbouring shores. The marine species here collected Ann. & Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 2. Vol. xix. 2 Prof. W. Smith on the Diatomacez of the Pyrenees. were almost identical with those already familiar to me on the southern coasts of England; but a fountain in the court of the hotel (Frascati) at which I sojourned, supplied a form which was different not merely in species, but in genus, from any I have hitherto recorded as British; this was the Diadesmis described in a subsequent part of the present paper. From an oyster tank at St. Adress, about a mile north of Havre, I also made a gathering, which, on being prepared for mounting, supplied numerous valves of Zygoceros Surirella. This species I have placed in Appendix B. of the ‘Synopsis of the British Diato- macee,’ as described and figured by Mr. Roper in the ‘ Trans- actions of the Microscopical Society,’ but as not. sufficiently known to me to be admitted into the body of the work. I regret to say that I must still leave it undescribed. I did not detect it while the gathermg was recent; and in cases where doubt exists, a diagnosis from a prepared slide is usually imsuf- ficient for the foundation of a species, or even the correct deter- mination of the generic position of a Diatomaceous frustule. The same gathering furnished specimens of the rare British forms, Nitzschia spathulata and Eucampia Zodiacus; the latter is however more general than its rare detection might seem to imply, being only conspicuous in a fresh state, and becoming so diaphanous when prepared in acid as to elude the notice of ob- servers. Excellent specimens collected from a small pool on the Janding-slip at Birkenhead have lately been sent to me by Mr. T. Comber of Liverpool, and the species is probably distri- buted along most of the British shores. On the 19th June I reached Falaise and spent a few days with M. de Brébisson, whose knowledge of algology, and more especially of the freshwater forms of the Diatomacez, has so often aided and illustrated my researches. | It was unnecessary for me to explore a district that had for years been subjected to the examination of so acute an observer, and a rough gathering from the public fountain in the “ Place,” graced with a noble statue of the Conqueror of England, was the only one made in this neighbourhood ; it supplied a few common British species, among which Gomphonema olivaceum was largely predominant. ) On the 23rd July I proceeded by Alencgon and Le Mans to Tours. The fearful inundations which had desolated the borders of the Loire and its tributaries a few weeks before my arrival, had borne off all accumulations of Diatomacez, and left little to detain me in this otherwise. rich and beautiful country. Pro- ceeding rapidly to the south, I passed through Bordeaux to the borders of the great salt lagoon lying a few miles to the south Prof. W. Smith on the Diatomacez of the Pyrenees. 3 of the mouth of the Garonne, and known as the Bassin d’ Arca- chon ; here I had anticipated an abundant harvest of marine forms, and my expectation would no doubt have been realized but for the extreme heat of the weather, which suddenly assumed a tropical character, drying up the smaller pools, and absolutely forbidding active exertion. A few gatherings however furnished me with some interesting species ; among others, with Campylodiscus cribrosus and Nitzschia scalaris, the latter having been long confined in its known European distribution to the single locality in Poole Bay, where I had first detected it as a British denizen, and only within the last few months shown to have a wider range by its discovery by Mr. Okeden in Milford Haven. This species is in several respects important in reference to our present inquiry. Its great size and conspicuous markings render it easy of detection and identification, and the species-manufacturer has no excuse for elevating its varieties into new forms, and thus destroying its value as an index of geographical distribution. Ehrenberg’s figure, as copied in Kiitz. Bacill. xxviii. 32, is quite characteristic, and he gives Surinam as its locality. His only other locality of the recent frustule is Kourdistan, but this freshwater station is open to suspicion. The references in the ‘ Microgéologie’ to the presence of this form in deposits are all worthless, as no description is given, and the carelessness evident in the execution of the figures forbids us to accept them as representations of our present species. The ascertained distribution of Nitzschia scalaris is, therefore, from. the northern shores of South America to the southern coasts of Britain, an area sufficiently large to establish the indifference of this Diatom to the climatal influences of latitude. On the 8rd of July I proceeded to Biarritz. This is almost the only point on the long line of shore extending from Brittany to the Spanish frontier, where the coast is not low and sandy, and in the holes and pools perforated by the turbulent waters of the Bay of Biscay in the soft nummulitic rock, which here attracts the admiration of the geologist, I made a few collections that supplied me with two or three forms unknown to the British flora ; these I have described in the sequel of this paper, On the face of the cliff beneath the Villa Eugénie, the new chateau of the Empress of the French, I also made a freshwater gathering, containing a new Epithemia, which, in compliment to the locality and its amiable mistress, I have named Epithemia Eugenia. On the 6th of July I proceeded through Pau to Eaux Bonnes and Haux Chaudes, and near the latter place, on the route to the [* 4 Prof. W. Smith on the Diatomaceze of the Pyrenees. Pic du Midi d’Ossau, collected a form new both to French and English algologists, but which has been detected in the Tyrol by A. Braun, and named by him Gomphogramma rupestre. It ap- pears to be frequent in the Pyrenees, as I met with it in several other localities. J have described it in its proper place. On the 10th of July I reached Cauterets, and during a stay of three weeks in that mountain village had ample opportunities of collecting the Diatomacez of the neighbourhood. A few of these will be found among my new species, but these are not so numerous as I had anticipated. The characters of the Pyrenean forms are only slightly modified from those of our own sub- alpine districts, and the careful systematist is obliged to regard such modifications as varieties rather than as new species. The hot sulphureous springs which abound in the vicinity of Cauterets, although supplying “ Barregene” in abundance, are not prolific in Diatomacee. The latter enter but rarely, and accidentally rather than substantially, into the composition of this curious substance, which mainly consists of various species of filamentous Algz, such as Oscillatoria, Leptothriz, and Phor- midium. Three others of the Pyrenean valleys, those of the Gave de Gavarnie, Gave de Baréges, and the Gave d’Adour, supplied me with numerous gatherings, without adding materially to the number or variety of the species collected at Cauterets. I left Bagnéres de Bigorre on the 10th August, and reached Paris on the 13th, having made but one gathering on the route, from the fosse of the Chateau de Chambord near Blois, which however proved wholly devoid of either novelty or interest. The gatherings made during the above excursion amounted to sixty-four; of these, nearly fifty contained species of more or less interest in a geographical point of view, being many of them identical with those collected on my former journey, and all of them with forms found in the British Islands, and described in the ‘ Synopsis of the British Diatomacez.’ I give a list of these, which I have divided into two classes. Ist. Those collected in marine or brackish-water localities on the western coasts of France. 2nd. Pyrenean forms found at elevations varying from 3000 to 7000 feet above the level of the sea; and I subjoin a list of those species or varieties not figured or described in the ‘ Synopsis.’ In the first two lists | have annexed a cipher to the name of the species, denoting the number of localities in which the form occurred, Prof. W. Smith on the Diatomacez of the Pyrenees. 1. Marine or Brackish-water Forms. Number of gatherings made, 8. Epithemia Musculus_ ............ 1 Amphora affinis ...........seeeee. 2 GRU Oss lanbiacicoanskieonecs 1 Membranacea ....c..e.cceeee l Cocconeis Scutellum ..........4. 6 Scutellum, var. B. .......-. 3 diaphana. .......... betauaaeee 3 — diaphana, var. B. — ......+6+ 2 Coscinodiscus eccentricus ...... 74 FUGIURCUS die disccn POST GaN 3 Eupodiscus sculptus .........+6- 1 Actinocyelus undulatus ......... + Cyclotella Kiitzingiana ......... 2 Campylodiscus cribrosus ......... ] PATVULUS icsccccoceecrcccccees ] EERIE ER 1 Surirella striatula ...........seeeees 2 OUND. cccvtdneabathadehapare 2 ROPER 2 oss cs ah aobaaaks aoe 3 SMALE. cu csnchstensesm gate ee SOUTER: cukstveadernnesss 1 Tryblionella Scutellum_......... 1 QYACIIS ...eceeseecerecseeeecees 2 ——— Margimata eeerseevereseceere 2 ACUMINATA ssseeee Reddccuanks 3 WOU 52255 Vee dn vedentes ] NE Sie ee vad eakas bs Nitzschia scalaris ......seescecseees l Nee ee ae cedpians 2 —— bilobata Sh dadenktsninhies 2 Sigma ...cccccersseneceesecees 3 ONPUATIG 5.65 sacak eesdense cee. 2 spathulata ssiseocerececereee ] CRO RIIATE on oi. cs Saco necanen 1 Amphiprora alata ....cesseceeeeenes 2 Navicula didyma. ............s000 4 punctulata ......cccsceeeeee ae —— Smithii~ ........ccececceeeves 2 get EEE La ass ciietuks Gecedbenss 1 ———_ PUIG, ces nceenssssinececespoeee 2 COPRDEEE Fic Gas Chadha taee sone cnes 1 —— PYFMHA os. eeeeoee Peentaud ds 2 Palpebralis coecrissveseseeess 3 Navicula Hennedyii WOR. vinsiseseencens eeececees Pinnularia peregrina sis DOIN a casnksesonnstratnaseese —— Cyprinus CIFOOE han cao'e Sbbaghoonsauinue Stauroneis pulchella pulchella, var. 8. Pleurosigma Balticum angulatum rigidum decorum Synedra affinis Gallionii Gallionii, var. B. Arcus tabulata undulata Gomphonema marinum Rhipidophora elongata Bacillaria paradoxa Fragilaria striatula Eucampia Zodiacus .........+..0+6 Achnanthes longipes ...e+e.eee longipes, Var. 7. .seseseeeees brevipes Rhabdonema arcuatum Adriaticum minutum ....... psa tede pais Grammatophora marina serpentina MRROH GREE Sosy 2 nine sent redes Amphitetras antediluviana Biddulphia pulchella aurita Rhombus Podosira hormoides ...... AER EES Montagnei Melosira subflexilis nummuloides Orthosira marina Schizonema cruciger Grevillii fee eeeeeeeerene eeeeoeeoeseeseetes eeeseertee eeoeeeeereteseee @eneeeceee @eoveseseeseetetsse eoeereeerrerseseseeone eeeeeeeeeereeoeees eeneeeerererere wet oeee severe seereee 2. Pyrenean Forms. Number of gatherings made, 56. Epithemia Zebra ..... i aN 3 MPIGR, ccccaxisvcnctbacess cases 2 FUPOBUVIS Sos e ccc rc sce csc ee nee 6 RANA: Casas ota o eines cag esos’ 3 Epithemia ventricosa Eunotia Arcus diodon Cymbella Helvetica Helvetica 8. Sere eseeeeeeteeseesees cr 6 Prof. W. Smith on the Diatomacem of the Pyrenees. Cymbella Scotica ..........ssses0s - 6 Pinnularia hemiptera ............ 10 Scotica 8. ...... ae ares 5 Stauroneis anceps ...seseeeveee SE VENETICOSA —-sevsnrpecrondieds 18 QTACUIS ccs cersesrecsoreescceces 6 MOTI Hoicy bak sense vecdis pana SB —— punctata .......cscocceseccees 3 —— Hqualis .....sceesseevereveee 2 ERORIAN © 5. cocve se vesens os cna aen 2 Mactilate «0.3035, 2.3<0cscaeaese 2 Pleurosigma attenuatum ......... 3 ——— lumata ..ccccrscovrcscccecerees 2 Synedra Ulna .......scscccecseees . 24 CUSPIARtA .ececssscccscceguse 6 ULE BD, nccncsscsetsrsnecens 2 Amphora ovalis ......seseceeesere G —— lumaris 20.02.02... ceceresoees 6 Cocconeis Pediculus — .......++00- 4 VOPR ioek ss cos Secaescavpnapee 6 Plscentila Scspested sscenacee 17 delicatissima ........-..0006 2 "Fhwaitesil ecccoscsseseeeees 4 Gomphonema constrictum ...... 8 Cyclotella operculata ............ 5 CAPUATUMN |... ro .cceceraceses 2 pesos SRGUTIIA' ono cas oe denavecsunshrare 1 Capitatum B. ...cccccsseceee 8 Campylodiscus costatus ......... 2 tenellum ...s0525..,.2,. eesede 30 combattis 2. wise l insigne ......... 2 Paid na Rup 1 Bpiralis:.ccceasvecesnecsensancs 2 dichotomum —..-eeereeeee a Surirella biseriata —........seseee 5 —— acuminatum —....cccscsseeee 5 imearis oS. 2e lh emecbecases 7 acuminatum B. .........006 2 PINNATA —erevevecrescscsccrens 3 OlivaCeUM ~ .....e.sseeeseceee 1 ANQUSEA 2.0... .sccosenveoses 1 Coceonema lanceolatum ......... 10 Tryblionella acuminata ......... 1 Cymbiforme ......ccccccsssoee 6 angustata si... ,..scssesseoses 3 Cistudar :*: | -osnoqy- me you a ee a IE ee ae —~ aaa as ag pcan meee aes arene - - es =m TANTS AAPA eS Le -yynog ‘odoyAy “yy10m ‘bI-6 J “SHES “MOqoTqun A TL#4s ‘OT 48} “WOW fF-T J.T 04 «| *|ung, *ySno yy Sg eee ‘Teumo r [eorBozoox) wopuoy|*** Sury “* snueisnyory 10ITYD) ‘gE *V@Od0URLSV) ‘9 F'9T qu} “UoW § Zr “d [ST PL J'AI Id ‘6T. 104 SpeUny i! Ms a ae ea sii sai aoyTquiny| "329 ‘weonuhdvdqns 4 mqowwosg |‘ eyed ‘toa ‘OA NL SUBLT] OSMOF] sisuompounq vuTay) ‘ze ‘ “LI-FL FFT “Gey wom Sor “d |ST-OLF AL Td ‘614 ‘speury * |" ““)" moqotquinyy Teysuny eq “Sur ‘vunewosryounpr -wpy\ Syed ‘Joao “AN VL ‘SUBLT] OSMOF]"** vyeSuojo erpuoupr7| ‘Te ‘LF OT 78} “WOW gp “g "FAX “TOW *e Pie" oqotquinyy Teysuny|“u1 A wou ‘Sury ‘voruwmrg vhwapog|' Zt ‘d :yeq ‘sunhaja nwmst0ozyp|*** Sury|***** suBsezo soqtoe ; Ne Oy re Bibliographical Notices. 75 The authors have exercised a wise discretion in employing so large a proportion of their names in a swbgeneric sense. For although this extreme subdivision of natural groups may be useful in a few great collections, and convenient in special or elaborate monographs ; yet, for ordinary purposes, a much smaller number of divisions is suf- ficient. The generic names in general use do not exceed 300 for the whole of the living Encephalous Mollusca ; and we are quite sure that no conchologist, or brace of conchologists—not even the authors themselves—will ever learn the eleven hundred and odd names here propounded ; especially since so many of them are constructed in a form which takes no hold of the memory, e. g. Neda, Aspa, Thala, Ziba, Dinia, Sarnia, Peenia, Elara, Elaira, Idesa, Alaba, &c. &e. To the exoteric public this style is by no means attractive, nor is the taste of naturalists in general so far behind that of the rest of the world as to lead them to prefer Adanson as a model. Of the 18 genera and 121 new subgenera proposed by the authors, there is not one which calls for special notice ; they appear to be founded on empirical characters, such as we should have regarded as possessing at most a specific importance. ; The list of species appended to each genus and subgenus is one of the principal features of the work. It will be extremely convenient to those who have large collections, and may some time form the basis of what is very much wanted—a Geographical Catalogue of Shells. Of the 13,300 species, probably less than half are in the British Museum ; but a larger proportion is in the Cumingian col- lection, which the authors are understood to have chiefly used. High as this number is, the land snails might now be increased by 1000 names, and some marine genera (like Cyprea) are far from com- plete ; but many of the lists are swelled by the introduction of syno- nyms, varieties, and fossils, and will require considerable revision. The space occupied by the lists of species exceeds one-fourth part of the work ; while nearly another quarter is occupied with headings of various kinds. Thus before reaching the ‘“‘ Woodcock Murex ’”’ we encounter the following inscriptions :— Class, GASTEROPODA. Subclass, PROSOBRANCHIATA. Order, PECTINIBRANCHIATA. Suborder, PROBOSCIDIFERA. Family, Muricip. Subfamily, Muricin&. Genus, MuREx. Subgenus, HAuSTELLUM. Species, haustellum. The objection to this, however, is not so much the space it occupies, 76 Bibliographical Notices. or its technical appearance ; but this excessive subdivision annuls the main object of classification, which is the massing of facts under the fewest heads possible. We must not omit to commend the general correctness of the press, which shows the advantage of double authorship. A few typographical errors appear to have been inten- tionally copied ; such as Onchidium for Oncidium, Melibe for Me- libeea, Cythara for Cithara, Stobilus for Strobilus, and TripAoris for Triforis. At the bottom of p. 64 a sentence is left unfinished ; it should continue thus—‘“ side, at the junction between the head and abdomen, with a foot-like appendage. (Gray.)’? We have also noticed one paragraph which has quite escaped revision (at p. 15), where six errors occur in a dozen lines*. The most attractive part of the work, and that of which we can speak with the greatest satisfaction, is the series of illustrations by that excellent engraver and veteran conchologist James D. C. Sowerby. No less than 88 of these admirably-executed plates are devoted to the 680 genera before referred to; the subgenera are not figured. Besides the shell of each genus, the operculum is given wherever it is known, and representations of the living animals have been selected, especially from the great French works of MM. Quoy and Gaimard, D’Orbigny, and Eydoux and Souleyet. Many of the figures are marked “ original,’ but these are not always the best, and it is to be hoped the author will take a little more pains with any he may do in futuret. It must be observed that the opercula are all drawn upside down; and no scale is given, so that Helix pulchella looks bigger than H. rufescens, and nearly as large as H. cornu-gigantea. It will be necessary to examine and consider at some length the nomenclature and classification employed by the authors, both on account of the importance of their book and the extent to which it differs from the older treatises, especially the ‘ British Mollusca’ of Messrs. Forbes and Hanley, so lately issued from the same press, and which has deservedly taken the highest place as a work of reference and authority. On comparing the generic names employed by Messrs. H. and A. Adams with the terminology in general use, we find half the prin- cipal names (of the univalves) changed, on the pretence of priority! We say pretence, because a very slight examination would have shown that scarcely any of these names were accompanied by descrip- tions, or otherwise entitled to the adoption of conchologists. The authors have’ judiciously omitted dates, having doubtless found them a “delusion and a snare;’’ but the omission of refer- ences, in so large and pretentious a work, is, to say the least, unusual. * Thetis for Tethys; thecidicola for tethydicola; Ber for Baer; Lingri- citula for Linguatula; Pinnotheros for Pinnotheres; and Phospuga tor Phosphuga. At p. 252, Chilinia ‘‘ Cepuelca” and “ pulchra” appear to be misprints for ‘“‘ Tehuelcha” and “ Puelcha.” + Some of these figures are obviously taken from specimens in spirits ; such as the Argonauta Oweni, pl. 2, m which the sail-shaped arm is turned inside out; Tornatella solidula, pl. 56. f.2; and Pfeifferia micans, pl. 72. f. 11. Bibliographical Notices. 77 We have added dates, from Herrmannsen*, to the following list of names, showing how long they have been in use. And to the names employed by the authors we have appended a few others of older date, which, according to their own rule, ought to have been pre- ferred. ’ Names in use. Hyalea, Lam. 1799. Cleodora, Peron, 1810. Creseis, Rang, 1828. Cuvieria, Rang, 1827. Clio, Linn. 1767. Melongena, Sch. 1817. Pleurotoma, Lam. 1799. Triton, Montf. 1810. Ranella, Lam. 1812. Ricinula, Lam. 1812. Monoceros, Lam. 1809. Concholepas, Lam. 1801. Magilus, Montf. 1810. Oliva, Brug. 1789. Ancillaria, Lam. 1811. Fulgur, Montf. 1810. Cynodonta, Schum. Turbinella, Lam. 1799. Pyrula, Lam. 1799. Sigaretus, Lam. Cassidaria, Lam. 1812. Oniscia, Sby. 1825. Sealaria, Lam. 1801. Solarium, Lam. 1799. Pterocera, Lam. 1799. Rostellaria, Lam. Ovulum, Brug. 1789. Pirena, Lam. 1812. Paludina, Lam. Siliquaria, Brug. 1789. Crepidula, Lam. 1799. Hipponyx, Defr. 1819. Neritina, Lam. 1809. Navicella, Lam. Phasianella, Lam. 1804. Rotella, Lam. Names proposed by Messrs. Adams. Cavolina, “ Gioeni”’ (not of Bruguiére, 1792). Clio, “ Browne” (not. of Linn., Miill., Fabr., Brug., Cuv., Lam., Desh., or any other con~ chologist of note). Styliola, Lesueur (teste Blainville). Triptera, Q. & G. 1824.T Clione, Pallas, 1774. Cassidulus, Humph. (not. Lam., Fér., or Latr.). Turris, Humph. (Cophinosalpinz, KI. 1753). Tritonium, Link (not Lovén) ; Buccinum, K1. Bursa, Bolten (not Bonanni or Petiver). Pentadactylus, K\. 1753. (Also Tribulus, K1.) Acanthina, Fischer, 1817 (Thais, Bolten, 1798). Conchopatella, Chemnitz ! Campylotus, Guett.{ (Tubulites, Davila). Dactylus, K1. (Cylindrus, Breynius). Ancilla, Lam. (olim). Busycon, Bolten. Vasum, Bolten. Mazza, Klein. Sycotypus, Browne, 1756 (Ficus, Kl. 1753). Catinus, Ad. (‘‘ Catinus-lactis,” Klein). Galeodea, Link (not Martini or Bolten). Morum, Bolten, 1798 (Cassidea, Brug. 1792). Scala, Klein. Architectonica, Bolten (Nerita, Kl. 1753). Harpago, Kl. (Also Heptadactylus, Radiz- bryonia, &c.) Gladius, K1. Amphiperas, Gron. 1781 (Porcellana, K1.). Faunus, Montf. 1810. (Young shell.) Vivipare, Lam. (olim) Saccus, Klein ! Tenagoda, Guett. (Solen-anguinus, K1.). Crypta, Humph. Cochlolepas, K1. Neritella, Humph. (Vitta, K1. 1753). Catillus, Humph. Eutropia, Humph. Umbonium, Link. * Index Generum Malacozoorum. 8vo. Cassell, 1846-52. + This name was given to an imperfect, and misunderstood specimen. In the same plate, and in the same page, the authors figured and described the perfect Cuvierta under tbe name of Cleodora obtusa, showing they had no intention of founding a genus (in Triptera) equivalent to Cuvieria. { We cannot find any such “genus” in Guettard’s Memoirs, but according to Blainville it was merely a name given to a miscellaneous assemblage, including Vermetus, Scalaria, Magilus, &c. 78 Bibliographical Notices. Names in use. Names proposed by Messrs. Adams. Delphinula, Lam. 1803. Angaria, Bolten (Cricostoma, K1.). Puncturella, Lowe, 1827. | Cemoria, “ Leach ” (Sw. 1840). Parmophorus, Bl. 1817. Scutus, Montf. 1810. Acmea, Esch. 1833. Tectura, Aud. & M.-E. (not defined). Tornatella, Lam. 1812. Acteon, Montf. 1810 (Solidula, Fisch.). Doridium, Meckel. Aglaia, Renieri. Umbrella, Lam. 1812. ** Opnerculatum leve,”’ Mus. Tessin. Goniodoris, Forbes. Doriprismatica, D’Orb. (“ voc. pravum,” Herrm.). Antiopa, A. & H. Janus, Verany. Embletonia, A. & H. Clelia, Lovén (not the same thing). Firola, Brug. 1792. Pterotrachea, Forsk. Auricula, Lam. 1799. Ellobium, Bolten (Auris-Mide, K1.). The names thus introduced by the authors are of three kinds :— some are taken from works published before the time of Linnezeus ; others were never characterized, and come under the denomination of “MS. names ;”’ while a few were published under peculiar cireum- stances, so as to escape observation, and have become obsolete. With respect to pre-Linneean names it is unnecessary for us to ad- vocate the practice adopted by all the best naturalists ; we will only hint the extreme inconvenience of a nomenclature ever liable to change, and ever receding into the obscurity of olden literature. If the names of Klein are to be adopted, why not those of Langius, and Davila, and Breynius, Bonanni, and Petiver? And if some of Klein’s names are used, why not all ?—‘ Cornu-hammonis”’ for Spirula, ** Dontostoma”’ for Nerita, “ Auris”’ for Haliotis, ‘‘Hamus’’ for Tectaria, and “ Auricula”’ for Limnea? If Pentadactylus and Argo- Buccinum are to be introduced, why not also Cophinosalping and duris-Mide, Saccus and Radix-Bryonie, Garagoi and Solen-anguinus? Have not these also “ priority” ? And why is “ Catinus-lactis,”’ Klein, to be changed to Catinus, since euphony and taste are not to be con- sidered? The folly of using ‘‘ Dactylus, Klein,” for the olive-shells is conspicuous, because the Dactylus, or date-shell, of all the other _ old writers is that burrowing bivalve the Lithodomus. The question of manuscript names is more difficult, owing to the wilfulness of authors. One says it is sufficient to write a new generic name on a tablet and shut it up in his cabinet,—it is to be dated from that act*. Another distinguished Professor, of an English Univer- sity, holds that to inscribe the name on a Museum specimen is a suf- ficient act of publication, leaving the determination of the date to the memory of the Curator. Some consider the insertion of a new generic name in a catalogue, without a word of description, without even a specific name attached, is sufficient to give “priority.” Others, more modestly, admit the desirableness of the addition of a known specific name, but do not consider any description necessary ; any one that pleases may find out the characters of the new genus, and if it ~ has none, it is but one more name added to the synonymy. There * Introduction to D’Orbigny’s ‘ Prodrome de Paléontologie.’ Bibliographical Notices. 79 are other authors besides Rafinesque, who will be remembered chiefly by the spurious genera they have made. The genera of Humphrey, quoted in the foregoing list, appeared in the ‘‘ Museum Calonneanum,”’ a Catalogue published anonymously in the year 1797, and containing names only, without definitions. The names attributed to Bolten are also supposed to be taken from a Catalogue, but who has ever seen it? We have found the name ** Gevers”’ placed as the authority for Meuschen’s names in the Mus. Geversianum, and “ Berlin” for Link’s names in the Berlin Museum. But who wrote the “Museum Boltenianum”? The authors have not thought these things worth inquiring into, and we quite agree with them so far. The Linnzean code, of which Herrmannsen gives an excellent digest, and the Rules of the British Association require that names should be really published, and accompanied by a description sufficient to identify the object and justify the imposition of the new term. The last case we have to consider is that of names which have been properly defined in the pages of rare and obscure publications, and have remained unknown till discovered by chance after many years. The great work of Pallas, destroyed by fire, and not reprinted for half a century ; the MS. of De Blainville’s ‘ Malacologie,’ mislaid by Dr. Leach ; and Leach’s own manuscript, unprinted till its value had nearly departed,—are examples of the casualties which attend author- ship. In Messrs. Adams’s Genera, we find the authority of Link cited for some names older than those of Lamarck; and it appears by a note of Herrmannsen’s that four parts of a little work were printed in 1806-8, and afterwards burnt by their distinguished author ; all that we know of them is derived from a solitary copy, found accidentally by M. Mérch, at Lund in Scania. Now, how- ever much we may regret these circumstances, it may well be doubted whether names in general use—names which have been employed in many countries and in many books, and have become familiar as household words—should be changed ‘in justice to the memory ”’ of authors long since removed from these and all other vanities. It must not be supposed that the venerable nomenclature employed by our authors has been obtained by a vast amount of research, entitling them to throw off the fetters of the Lamarckian or any — other “school.” If they have not followed any of the great concho- logists, they have borrowed their terminology from a very unpre- tending source—the Sale-Catalogue of the Yoldi Collection, by a young and enthusiastic native of Copenhagen, Otto Mérch (angl. Murk)—where we find all these names, prudently inclosed in brackets, after those which would be intelligible to the shell-buying world. We feel bound to say that we cannot believe these names will ever come into general use ; the authors have thrown fresh impediments in the path of the student, and have lost the opportunity of making theirs the chief and standard work on conchological nomenclature. The classification adopted by Messrs. Adams will be most readily seen by putting in a tabular form, and translating for the convenience 80 Bibliographical Notices. of our readers, the names of those genera only which are regarded as types of families, and omitting nearly all the subdivisional names. Class I. CepHaLoropa: Order Octopoda ; Octopus, Philonexis, Argonauta. Order Decapoda; Cranchia, Loligopsis, Chiroteuthis, Onycho- teuthis, Loligo, Sepia, Spirula. Order Polypoda; Nautilus. Class II. Preropopa: Order Thecosomata; Hyalea, Cuvieria, Cymbulia, Limacina. Order Gymnosomata ; Clio, Pneumodermon, Cymodocea. Class III. Gasrrroropa: Order Pectinibranchiata (A. Probos- cidifera) ; Murex, Pleurotoma, Triton, Buccinum, Oliva, Fasciolaria, Turbinella, Voluta, Mitra, Marginella, Dolium, Pyrula, Velutina, Lamellaria, Natica, Cassis, Scalaria, Terebra, Pyramidella, Eulima, Stylifer, Cerithiopsis, Solarium. (B. Towifera.) Conus. (C. Rostrifera.) Strombus, Cypreea, Ovulum, Pedicularia, Cancel- laria, Trichotropis, Aporrhais, Cerithium, Melania, Littorma, Plan- axis, Jeffreysia, Rissoa, Paludina, Valvata, Ampullaria, Turritella, Ceecum, Vermetus, Phorus, Calyptreea, Pileopsis, Narica. Order Scutibranchiata ; Nerita, Trochus, Haliotis, Fissurella, Den- talium, Acmzea, Gadinia, Patella, Chiton. Order Tectibranchiata; Tornatella, Aplustrum, Cylichna, Bulla, Philine, Icarus, Aplysia, Pleurobranchus, Runcina, Pleurophyllidia, Phyllidia. Order Nudibranchiata; Doris, Oncidoris, Triopa, Tritonia, Proc- tonotus, Molis, Hermeea, Elysia, Limapontia. Subclass Hereropopa ; lanthina, Macgillivrayia, Atlanta, Firola, Phyllirhoa, Pterosoma. Subclass PuLMoniFERA: (A. Inoperculata;) Glandina, Testa- cella, Helix, Limax, Stenopus, Arion, Janella, Vaginulus, Oncidium, Auricula, Limneea, Amphibola, Siphonaria. (B. Operculata ;) Cyclophorus, Helicina, Truncatella, Assiminia. In the first class, CepHALOPODA, we see with regret, that the phi- losophical arrangement and terminology proposed by Prof. Owen has been abandoned for a new and empirical scheme, burthened with _ such frivolous terms as “‘ Chondrophora,” and ‘ Sepiophora,”’ &c. The great tetra-branchiate order is termed “ Polypoda,” although that phrase was employed by Gistel for the whole of the Cuttlefishes, and is most appropriate to the Octopods—the Polypi of the ancients. It is not contended that the law of priority applies to names of higher than generic importance,—they are formed by rule; and in the other classes the names of the Orders are founded on branchial characters. The first, and most important division of the GasrERoPopA, pre- sents a remarkable scene of confusion, as if the Families had been thrown out of a dice-box. Pleurotoma is at the commencement, Conus (in a separate suborder) at the end; Fasciolaria is separate from Fusus, and Dolium from Cassis. The shells called ‘‘ Nassaria’’ are certainly Bibliographical Notices. 81 Tritons, and have no business with the ‘“ Nasside.’’ We do not quite see the difference between “Sipho”’ (Islandicus) and ‘ Euthria”’ (cornea) ; our difficulty has always been to know which was the Lin- nzean species —but now they are distinct genera. Fastigiella, at most only a form of Cerithium, is placed with Turbinella (p. 155), and Ringicula, which is known to be related to Tornatella, is associated with Dolium (p. 197). The authors have rightly hesitated to remove Philippia from Solarium, although unaware of one reason for keep- ing them together, viz. that in both the apew is inverted and can only be seen by looking into the umbilicus ; this character affords an additional ground for putting them near Pyramidella. In the second great division of Univalves (Rostrifera) we find the Cypreide placed between Strombus and Aporrhais, instead of fol- lowing Marginella and Erato in the previous order; although amongst the illustrations are figures of Hrato levis and Cyprea europea, both copied from Forbes and Hanley, who represent and describe them as being essentially alike. Planawis, placed next to the Littorinide, appears to us more nearly related to Cerithium ; its lingual dentition also, according to the observations of Mr. Charlton of Gloucester, agrees better with that type. Fossarus (p. 319) is made to follow Lacuna, its natural ally ; but Narica (“ Vanikoro’’) is placed much further on, at the end of the **bonnet-limpets ”’ (p. 374). We should like to know how to sepa- rate these shells ; for the distinguishing characters are not given, and many of the species enumerated might with equal propriety be re- ferred to either. The same is the case with Cyclostrema (p. 405), and Adeorbis (p. 407), which appear to be identical. Amongst the genera of Pearly Univalves we have been quite be- wildered. All the leading facts and general cireumstances are frittered away and lost sight of in the mass of petty details—of merely spe- cific importance—which are here exalted into most prominent notice. Thus we find a ‘‘subfamily,” of one genus, with no other character than operculum ovate (p. 389), while the next “ subfamily ” has the operculum orbicular. Passing on to the key-hole limpets, we find fifty kinds of Fissu- rella (including the British species) referred to Gray’s genus Luca- pina, which was certainly not intended for such a rabble. And in describing Macroschisma, the authors have forgotten to refer to their usual vade mecum, and ventured the original and very unfortunate remark that the ‘‘ aperture is much nearer the front margin than in the other genera of the family’! (p. 447). We thought Chiton ami- culatus had been the type of Cryptochiton, but find it placed in a separate ‘‘ subfamily.” In the Nudibranchiate Order, Melibea and Doto are referred to different families, with ‘‘ Proctonotidee’’ between; and the whole treatment of the group is in contrast with the beautiful monograph of Alder and Hancock. The Subclass Hereroropa is a remarkable assemblage, including LIanthina, which has a dentition and some other characters in com- Amn. & Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 2. Vol. xix. 6 82 Bibliographical Notices. mon with Scalaria; Phyllirhoa, organized like the lowest Nudi- branchiata; and the fabulous Pferosoma, in addition to the Atlan- tide and Firolide, which in some respects resemble the Strombs. In the Subclass Putmontrera the principal novelty is the con- stitution of the family Oleacinide, for which there are good grounds, if it be restricted to the shells usually known as Glandine. It may however be doubted whether Bulimus decollatus and a hundred others which the authors have included, really belong to the family ; least of all should we admit the little Zwa lubrica, figured as an illustration of the group, and called by mistake “ Oleacina tridens”’ (pl. 71. f. 1). On the other hand, they have placed in the same subgenus with the tiny needle-shell ( Cionella acicula) the great Glandina Algira, which has a lingual organ as large as that of the Testacella, armed with equally formidable teeth, arranged in V-shaped rows. In the list of species we observe the Achatina cylichna of Lowe, which is a fossil ; while the Achatina gracilis of the same author figures in three places, as Oleacina ( Azeca) terebella, again as Glandina (Acicula) gracilis, and, 200 pages further on, as Acicula gracilis. In the family Auriculide (“ Ellobiidee,’ Adams) we searched for our twin British species Conovulus denticulatus and bidentatus, which when young are so alike, but found no such name as Cono- vulus, although we encountered some strange characters called Pira, Tifata, Signia, and Persa (the name-maker must have been terribly hard up !); at length we discovered our old acquaintances, under the disguise of Lewconia and Alexia, in two distinct subfamilies. Lastly, we must confess that the position of Truncatella and Assi- minea with the Pulmoniferous land snails is utterly beyond our com- prehension at the present instant. : In the Prospectus attached to the first number of this work, the authors have very truly stated that at the present day there is a very general wish shown by zoological students to learn something of “ the habits, organization, and affinities of the animals which construct shells.”” We have always found that those who took a hearty in- terest in shells, were still more interested in shell-fish, and without going into anatomical researches, there was enough in the study of external or zoological characters to afford very high gratification. Every one knows, who has studied natural history, that this pleasure is personal, and independent of utilitarian considerations or the sti- mulus of ambitious competition. The Zoological Illustrations, and abridged descriptions of the ani- mals of the genera, are certainly the most valuable portion of the work, and reflect the greatest credit on the industry and skill of authors and artist. We have had opportunity of seeing the pains taken by Mr. Sowerby to make the best of his materials. The para- graphs relating to structure, physiology, and habits, are scarcely so satisfactory as might have been expected from the profession of one of the authors, and the promise in the prospectus. The signs of compilation are obvious at every step, and too often of unintelligent compilation. In the first chapter the metamorphosis of the Gaste- ropoda is described as applying to all Mollusca (p.7). The tongue of the carnivorous Gasteropods is said to be “ forked and fleshy,” Bibliographical Notices. 83 while in some others it is coiled spirally “in the stomach ;’’ the Tunicata, we are told, have no tongue. Some of the technical terms are used in such a sense as to require a special glossary ; thus (at p- 13) some opercula are said to be “ annular and multispiral,” while im other places (e. g. p. 345) concentric opercula are called “ an- nular.” In plain English “ annular ”’ means like a ring, 7. e. with a hole in the middle, and ‘‘ no operculum presents an annular form *.”’ At p.14 we are informed, “ the epdermis, like that of other animals, is inorganic, and cast off occasionally by the animal,’’ and the shell itself is called “epithelium.’’ At p. 18 the Octopoda are defined as having “foot none;” but to make up for it, at p. 16, they have “ears developed.” This last announcement would have amazed us more, but for the recollection of the phrase “ auricular crests’ em- ployed by D’Orbigny for the little processes on the sides of the head in some Calamaries, and which have as much to do with hearing as the “ears”? of the sea-hare. Under the genus Achatinella it is stated that ‘the females are ovo-viviparous”’ (p. 136), and again under Partula, ‘the females produce their young alive’’ (p. 145); we will not ask what the males are. The references to fossil shells are few, and would have been better omitted, as the authors appear to have had no experience in such matters. They are certainly wrong in referring Marginella pellucida to the extinct genus Volvaria (p. 194) ; and are evidently misinformed about Discohelix and Serpularia, or they would not have described recent shells under those names. é _Not much is made of the geographical distribution of the genera; at first the notices are very few and loose, but are more frequent afterwards, as the subgenera of land shells were chiefly founded on geographical considerations. We do not know what was intended by “north coast of America” given as a locality of Oleacina ; but at p- 92, for ‘‘ low latitudes” we should read “high.” Tornatellina is said to be found in Madeira, but the only Madeiran species is removed to another family. : Most writers, especially when their publications extend over several years, become more cautious as they proceed, and we hope soon to congratulate the authors on the completion of their work in a style _ improved by experience ; we shall do so more heartily if they will use the opportunity afforded by their preface and appendix to ac- knowledge and correct such things as may yet be rectified. Das Gebiss der Schnecken, zur Begriindung einer natitrlichen Classt- fication, untersucht von Dr. F. H. Troscuet, Professor an der Universitat zu Bonn. Erste Lieferung, mit vier Kupfertafeln von Huco Troscueu. Berlin, 1856, 4to. Dr. Troschel says that he has devoted twenty years to the study of the teeth of Mollusca, and laboured to collect every material that could throw light on the subject. He considers that there are now two elasses of students, conchologists and malacozoologists ; the latter take the only imperishable, unchangeable organ of the molluscous animal * Owen, Hunterian Lectures on the Invertebrata, p. 543. 6* 84 Bibliographical Notices. as their study; and for their justification the author alludes to the importance attached to the teeth in the classification of the entire animal kingdom, considering the anatomy of the mouth in Mollusea quite as important as in any other class of animals. Whether there are also peculiarities in the mouth-apparatus of Bivalves and other mollusks which do not possess any fixed portions and which suck in their nourishment from the tidal currents, the author leaves for future consideration, but considers that by further inquiries much might be learnt on the subject. He is also of opinion that this study of the teeth of Mollusca is of the greatest importance to the malaco- zoologist, for, while it is almost impossible, even in spirits, to pre- serve the soft, perishable bodies of the snails, it is doubly welcome to him to possess a fixed, decided, and easily preserved organ, which is so exactly calculated to establish the relations of the genera. Very much has been written on the subject, but the results of these researches are so scattered and so little known, that the author has decided in the present work to collect all that has been pub- lished, and, with the addition of his own observations, so to arrange and illustrate the rich store of materials that every future student may with ease compare his own observations with those of others, and thus distinguish new discoveries from those already established. For this present work he copies all such drawings as relate to the subject, carefully noting the author and the book from which he takes them. It is probable, in consequence of the interest which the subject has of late created, that during the publication of the work, much may appear of which the author may not be able to take notice. In order as much as possible to avoid this difficulty, he earnestly begs all who are studying the teeth of Mollusca to inform him without delay of the results of their labours, which he will publish (always pro- vided the drawings be true to nature) with the fullest acknowledge- ment of the authorship. Finally he proposes, at the close of the work, to write a supple- ment, in which he will make mention of such new discoveries as may have appeared during its publication, or that he may have overlooked in former works, and will feel grateful to any one who will point out any such omissions. The part now published is devoted to the teeth of the Hetero- poda, the Pteropoda, and part of the Pulmonata Operculata of the Gasteropoda, and is illustrated with four very clearly engraved plates, each containing many subjects, which, besides showing copies of the various figures which have been hitherto published of the teeth of these animals. contain a number of drawings of teeth now figured for the first time. We must consider this as a very import- ant work, and shall watch its progress with interest. As one fact of interest, we may observe that some of the Cyclo- stomide figured show a great affinity to the teeth of Proserpina, described and figured in a preceding Number of this Journal, and in this manner an analogy to the numerous hair-like teeth of the To- chide ; but in these land shells, instead of there being a very large Zoological Society. 85 number of hair-like teeth, there is a single very large lateral tooth divided into numerous more or less slender hair-like pectinate lobes, somewhat similar to the teeth of the Ovulide. Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis; Auctore ALPHONSO DE CANDOLLE. Vol. 14. pars prior. Parisiis, 1856, pp. 492. It is pleasing to have to announce the publication of another volume of this invaluable work, and to be able to state that it fully supports the character borne by its predecessors. These later volumes, which treat of Monochlamydeous plants, are also the more acceptable from their containing descriptions of Natural Orders, which, from their position in the usual sequence of the orders, have not been ela- borated in many extensive systematic works. Some authors have commenced with the Ranunculaceze, others have started from the _ Algee or Gramineze, and have not been enabled to extend their respective works so far as to arrive at them. This volume contains the Polygonaceee by Bentham and Meisner, Myristicaceee by A. de Candolle, Proteaceze by Meisner, Penzeaceze and Geissolomaceze by A. de Candolle. The last of these, if really a distinct order, is singular as including only one known species of plant. The names of the authors are a sufficient surety that the plants have been carefully studied and skilfully described and arranged. We have had occasion to examine some parts of the book with care, and must be allowed to express our admiration of them. We may especially refer to the suborder Polygoneze, including, with others, the genera Rumex and Polygonum. Both of these present exceeding difficulty from the large number of closely allied species included in them. They are genera to which Professor Meisner has long paid much attention, and he seems to have drawn the line skil- fully between the excessive tendency to combination of some writers, and the extreme desire to found new species, of others. It is expected that other volumes will soon follow that which is now before us; and we may be allowed to express a hope, that the early volumes of the ‘ Prodromus’ will soon be considered with a view of their being re-written, in conformity with the more perfect state in which their successors have issued from the press. PROCEEDINGS OF LEARNED SOCIETIES. ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY. . February 26, 1856.—Dr. Gray, F.R.S., in the Chair. ON SOME ADDITIONAL SPECIES OF BIRDS RECEIVED IN ~ COLLECTIONS FROM BoGoTa. By Puitie Lutiey Scuater, M.A., F.Z.S. MM. Verreaux of Paris, knowing the interest I take in New Grenadian ornithology, have most kindly transmitted to me some 86 Zoological Society :— specimens of birds from a collection lately received from Bogota, which did not appear to them to be included in my list, published in this Society’s ‘ Proceedings’ for 1855. I have also myself no- ticed a few others, which I had not previously remarked in collec- tions from that locality. From these sourees I am enabled to lay before the Society a list of twenty-two species, which, added to those given in my former catalogue, raise the total number of birds now ascertained as belonging to this peculiar fauna to 457. ]. NycraLe wARRIsI, Cassin, Pr. Ac. Sc. Phil. (1849) iv. p. 157, et Journ. Ac. Sc. Phil. N. 8. ii. p. 53, pl. 5. Ciccaba gisella, Bp. Consp. p. 44. Gisella harrisi, Bp. Compt. Rend. 1855, Oct. 22nd. ‘ Nyctalitinus albipunctatus, Kaup,’ Gray, Cat. of Gen. of B., App. . 135. ‘ Dr. Hartlaub writes me word that the Bremen Museum has a Bogota specimen of this peculiar Owl, and the example in the Norwich Museum named by Dr. Kaup Nyctalitinus albipunctatus was received, I believe, from the same locality. 2. SYNALLAXIS ELEGANS, sp. nov. S. pallide murino-brunnea, infra medialiter albescentior, ventre medio eandido, crisso et lateribus dorso concoloribus : pileo toto, nist Sronte, alis extus et cauda rufis: loris albescentibus. Long. tota 6°4, alee 2°2, caudee 3°7. This Synallavis is very like a common Brazilian species, S.ruficapilla, Vieill., which it resembles in having the head, wings and tail bright rufous. But in the present bird the rufous colour does not extend over the front, which is brown like the back, there are no yellowish supercilia, or at least the very faintest traces of them, and the under plumage is not cinereous, but brown like the upper, only paler, and medially passing into white, which colour is quite pure in the middle of the belly. ‘The tail is longer, and the webs of the rectrices are not so broad as in the Brazilian bird. This species, like other true Synallazes, has only eight large rectrices and an outer pair abnormally small. Other birds, often placed in this genus,- have twelve, which is the number given by Vieillot in his generic characters, but I consider this erroneous, and believe the former number to be the normal one. The present bird seems not uncommon in Bogota collections, but has probably been hitherto confounded with its several allied species. 3. SYNALLAXIS MGSTA, Sp. NOY. S. olivascenti-brunnea, subtus paulo dilutior : alis intus nigris, extus castaneis: cauda rufa: loris et gutture albidioribus : tectricibus subalaribus pallide fulvis ; rostro valido, nigro; mandibula in- feriore basi albescente : pedibus pallidis. Long. tota 5°2, alee 2°5, caudee 2°5. The single specimen which I possess of this bird was received from MM. Verreaux. It is of a nearly uniform olive-brown, rather lighter below, particularly on the throat and sides of the head. The chestnut margin of the quills grows narrower towards their apices, leaving the Mr. P. L. Sclater on some species of Birds from Bogota. 87 dusky black apparent, but at their bases extends through both webs and shows itself underneath. The tail is pure rufous and very short, but I am not quite certain that it is of its normal length in my specimen, there being indications of a state of moult. The bill is rather stronger and more conical than in most species of the genus. Out of the six Synallaxes described by M. de Lafresnaye (Rev. Zool. 1843, p. 290) as from this country, I have as yet only met with three, namely, S, gularis, cinnamomeus and unirufus, which I have been able to identify with certainty. I have, however, speci- mens of a Bogota bird of this genus which I think may possibly be his S. fuliginosus, and there are examples of the same species in the British Museum. If I am correct in my conjectures, I may remark, that the description he gives of this bird is hardly sufficiently accurate, and I can only refer my specimens doubtfully to his species with the following characters : 4, SyNaALLAxis ruticinosa, Lafr. R. Z. 1843, p. 290? S. supra rufescenti-brunnea, alis extus paulo clarioribus, cauda adhuc clariore, pure brunnescenti-rufa, scapis plumarum nigris : rectri- cibus decem, angustissimis et tenuissimis: loris et superciliis in- distincte albidis: infra obscure cinerea, mento summo et ventre albescentioribus: rostro nigro: basi mandibule inferioris albicante ; pedibus validissimis clare brunneis. Long. tota 6°5, alee 2°3, caudee 3°75. The tail of this bird is of a clearer and more reddish-brown than the back, with the shafts of the feathers black. The outer pair of rectrices are abnormally small, measuring only one inch in length, the next pair about double that length. ‘The webs of all are ex- ceedingly narrow, in particular the outer ones, and grow finer towards the extremities. This form of Synallazis shows evident rapprochement towards Sylviorthorhynchus. 5. ANABATES RUFICAUDATUS, Lafr. et d’Orb. Syn. Av. in Mag. de Zool. 1838, p. 15. I possess a Bogota skin, received from MM. Verreaux, which M. de Lafresnaye has kindly identified for me as being of this species. The apical portion of the outer primaries in this bird is black, which colour gradually diminishes in extent in the succeeding feathers, and is reduced to a minimum in the secondaries, where it only forms a blotch at the ends. The first quill is nearly wholly black, and in those next succeeding the same colour advances far up the stems, being broadly margined outwardly with chestnut, and inwardly with paler cinnamomeous. 6. ANABATES ERYTHROPTERUS, sp. nov. ? A. supra pallide brunnescenti-cinereus ; alis extus et cauda tota rufis, remigum exteriorum parte apicali nigra: loris oculorum ambitu et gula cum tectricibus subalaribus cinnamomets: corpore cetero 88 Zoological Society :— subtus pallide cinnamomescenti-albido, lateribus olivaceo tinetis : rostro albido, culmine nigrescenti-plumbeo : pedibus pallidis. Long. tota 6°2, alee 3°6, caudze 3°1. The only Anabates I know of likely to resemble the present species is 4. guianensis (Pl. Enl. 686, fig. 2). I have never seen that bird, but if it has been correctly described, there is no doubt that this species is distinct. 7. XENOPS RUTILANS, Temm. Pl. Col. 72, fig. 2. A Bogota skin received from MM. Verreaux seems referable to this bird, though there is rather more black in the tail than in my Brazilian specimens. 8. MARGARORNIS BRUNNESCENS, Sp. Nov. M. umbrino-brunnea, capitis dorsique superi pennis obsolete et an- gustissime nigro marginulatis: infra pallide ochracescenti-albo guttulata, his guttulis nigro cinctis et deinde umbrino-brunneo terminatis: loris et gutture medio ochracescentibus, nigrescente paululum variegatis: rostro superiore nigro, inferiore flavido, pedibus clare brunneis. Long. tota 5:5, alee 2°5, caudee 2°5. MM. Verreaux have transmitted to me a single specimen of this bird, which forms a second species of the genus Margarornis, instituted by Reichenbach for the 4nabates squamiger, Lafr. & @Orb. M. de Lafresnaye has also coined the name Anabasitta for the same forra, but I believe the first-mentioned term has a slight priority. The type of the genus is very common in collections from Bogota. The present bird may be distinguished from it at once by the want of the bright chestnut colouring onthe back and tail. In form, however, there is not much difference. In M. brunnescens the beak is rather longer, and the first two primaries proportionately rather shorter. The elongation of the naked stems of the rectrices is carried to a greater extent in the present species than in the other. There are twelve tail-feathers, and they all terminate in a similar hair-like point. The plumage of the two species below shows much similarity, but in the ‘ drunnescens’’ the tear-like spots are yellowish. I may remark that Reichenbach has kept the Bogota and Bolivian Margarornithes apart, but M. de Lafresnaye, who knows both species, considers them identical. It is with Bogota specimens that I have been comparing the present bird. ALECTRURINE / 9. OcrHOHCA FUMICOLOR, sp. nov. O. supra fumoso-brunnea, dorso imo rufescentiore : alis caudaque nigris: tectricibus alarum rufo bivittatis, et secondariis ultimis extus rufescente marginatis : superciliis latis et fronte ad nucham ochracescenti-albis: subtus brunnescenti-murina, ventre medio albescentiore, gula quasi dorso concolore, sed pallidiore : rostro et pedibus nigris. Long. tota 6°0, alee 3°5, caudee 3°0. Mr. P. L. Sclater on some species of Birds from Bogota. 89 This bird appears to be naturally placed in Dr. Cabanis’ genus Octhoéca, of which the type is Octhoéca enanthoides (Fluvicola enanthoides, Orb. Voy. pl. 38, fig. 2). Other species belonging to this same group are Octhoéca leucophrys (Fluv. leucophrys, @Orb. Voy. pl. 38, fig. 1), which the present bird most resembles in colouring ; Octhoéca rufipectoralis (ibidem, pl. 37, fig. 2); Octhoéca Lessont, mihi (Tyrannulus rufipectus, Less. Descr. des Mamm. et Ois. p. 296) ; Octhoéca albidiema (Setophaga albidiema, Lafr. R. Z. 1848, p. 8), and, perhaps, Setophaga cin- namomeiventris, Latr. R. Z. 1845, p.80. The three species figured by d’Orbigny are from Bolivia; the three latter, like the present, from Bogota. They all offer considerable similarity in colours, and pre- sent, so far as [ am acquainted with them, the same structure. M. de Lafresnaye has indicated the existence and affinities of this group in his article in the ‘ Revue Zoologique,’ 1848, p.8. All d’Orbigny’s species inhabit his third zone of elevation, that is, above 11,000 feet above the sea-level, and it is probable, therefore, that the New Gre- nadian Octhoéce are likewise from the higher regions of the Andes. 10. KuscARTHMUS AGILIS, sp. nov. E. supra nigro et pallido brunneo mixtus, pennis plerumque nigris brunneo marginatis : crista capitis totius medialiter nigra, late- raliter autem et subtus pallide brunnea: alis nigris, tectricibus rufescente terminatis, secondariis extus pallescentibus: cauda unicolore nigra rectricum mediarum apicibus et omnium margi- nibus exterioribus pallescentibus : subtus pallide fulvo-flavidus ; capitis lateribus et gutture toto albis nigro variegatis ; pec- tore longitudinaliter nigro flammulato: rostro nigro, mandibule inferioris basi alba: pedibus nigerrimis : tectricibus subalaribus pallide fulvis. Long. tota 4°6, alee 2°2, caudee 2°4. This bird much resembles Euscarthmus parulus and E. albicristatus in general appearance, and may, I think, be safely placed in the same genus, though the bill is slightly broader, and the tail is propor- tionately rather longer, and has the rectrices more graduated. The only example I have seen of it was transmitted to me by MM. Verreaux. In the markings of the lower part of the body it is not unlike E. parulus, but the ground-colour is more yellowish, and the strize less distinct on the throat and more marked on the breast. Above, these two species are easily distinguishable. The present has the back brown, mixed with black blotches, and not uniform cinereous- olive, and the crest is shorter and differently formed,, the whole of the head-feathers being moderately lengthened, not a few of the centre feathers only, as in the elder species. Piprinz&. 11. PrpRA CORACINA, Sp. nov. Pipra leucocilla, Sclater, P. Z. 8. 1855, p. 152. Pipra coracina, J. et E. Verreaux, MS. 3 coracino-nigra: pileo nuchaque albis: rostro nigrescenti-plumbeo: 90 Zoological Society :— pedibus nigris. 3 junr. viridescenti-cinereus, pene unicolor, alis caudaque intus nigris. Long. tota 3°5, alee 2°8, caudee 1°2. MM. Verreaux have transmitted to me an adult and young male, and their MS. description of this species of Manakin, which they consider distinct from the well-known Pipra leucocilla, and I am inclined to think they are right. The black colour is generally more intense in the present bird, the white extends further back down the head, the wings are longer, and the bill rather shorter. They remark that the Peruvian bird (which I have not yet seen) appears to he the same as this species. ForRMICARIIN&. 12. CONOPOPHAGA CUCULLATA, Sp. nov. C. supra brunnescenti-olivacea, alis caudaque nigricantibus brun- nescente marginatis : capite toto et cervice postica cum gula et tectricum alarum marginibus clare rufo-castaneis : plaga pectorali alba: abdomine dilute cinereo, ventre medio et hypochondriis roseo aut rufescente tinctis : tectricibus subalaribus flavicanti-brunneis : rostro flavo : pedibus pallidis. Long. tota 4°0, ale 2°7, caudee 1°1. The single specimen sent to me by MM. Verreaux is the only example I have yet seen of this Conopophaga. It is not likely to be confounded with any other species of the genus that 1 am acquainted with, its bright chestnut head and throat and white pectoral patch rendering it eminently distinguishable. IcTERINA. 13. StuRNELLA LUDOVICIANA (Linn.). A single bird transmitted by MM. Verreaux seems to belong to this species. The yellow belly is rather brighter than in U.S. examples, but at present I can discover no essential difference. It is singular, if this is the North-American species, that the Mexican bird (Stur- nella hippocrepis, Wag.) is usually considered distinct. EMBERIZIN&. 14. Emperizorpes MAcRURUS (Gm.). Fringilla macroura, Gm. 8.N.i. 918. Tardivola macroura, Cab. M. H. p. 135 (note). A Bogota specimen of this bird which I have lately acquired agrees with the true H. macrurus from Cayenne, and seems to be quite distinct from the Brazilian #. marginalis (Temminck), with which it is generally made synonymous. TANAGRINZ. 15. CHLOROSPINGUS XANTHOPHRYS, Sp. nov. C. brunnescenti-olivaceus : loris nigricantibus: superciliis curtis a fronte ad oculum summum et corpore mediali subtus flavis: rostro nigro: pedibus pallide brunneis. Long. tota 4°7, alee 2°5, caudee 2-4. Mr. P. Li. Sclater on some species of Birds from Bogota. 91 Obs. Similis C. superciliari, sed minor, et superciliis brevioribus et flavis, capite non cinerascente, lateribusque olivascentibus digno- scendus. I possess a single example of this bird, and have seen others. 16. CuiorospinGus LICHTENSTEINI, sp. nov. Nemosia ver- ticalis, Licht. in Mus. Berol. (partim). C. supra cinereus, alis caudaque nigricantibus ; pileo atro: vitta mediali verticis ochracescenti-albida: subtus albidus: lateribus cinerascentibus. _ Obs. Similis C. verticali, sed major, gula ventre concolore, nec nigra, There is a single example of this bird in the Berlin Museum, received from M. Boissoneau of Paris along with specimens of C. verticalis, and not distinguished from that species. CoLUuMBz. 17. Cutora@nas BICOLOR (Vieill.). Col. bicolor, Vieill. N. D. d’H. N. xxvi. 345. C. vinacea, Temm. Pig. t.41. Mus. Brit. 18. ZenarpA RuUFICAUDA, G. R. Gray, MS. Bp. Coup d’ceil sur ordre des Pigeons, p.42. Mus. Brit. et Paris. 19. ZeENAIDA PENTHERIA, Bp. Coup d’eil, p. 42, et Consp. ii. p- 84. Mus. Brit. 20. CHAMHPELIA AMAZILIA, Bp. Coup d’ceil, p. 38, et Consp. i. p. 84. Mus. Brit. GALLINZE. 21. Coama&petes Goupoti (Less.). Ortalida Goudoti, Less. Man. d’Orn. ii. 217; et Tr. d’Orn.i. p.481. Chamepetes Goudotz, Wagler, Isis, 1832, p. 1227. GRALLZ. 22. GALLINAGO NOBILIS, sp. nov. G. supra nigro-cinereo et brunneo (sicut in plerisque hujus generis speciebus ) variegata: pileo summo nigro, vitta medial irregulariter cinnamomeo-brunnea : capitis lateribus et cervice postica pallide cinnamomeo-brunneis, minute nigro punctatis; his punctis intra rictum et oculum lineam formantibus: scapularibus nigris cinna- momeo vittatis, plaga subterminali nigra preditis et extus iterum late ochracescenti-albo marginatis: remigibus omnibus pure et pallide nigricanti-cinereis, secondariorum et alule spurie apicibus extus pallescentibus ; tectricibus albido et cinereo variegatis : subtus, gutture albicante, pectore toto cinnamomescenti-brunneo, nigricante flammulato ; ventre toto albo, hypochondriis et tectri- cibus subalaribus albo nigroque regulariter transvittatis ; tectri- cibus subcaudalibus albis cinnamomeo tinctis et nigro obsolete transfasciatis : caude@ rectricibus sedecem; harum octo medits nigris claro rufo late terminatis, hoc colore rufo iterum sub margine an- guste nigro vittato ; una utrinque proxima precedentibus assimili, 92 Zoological Society :— sed colore nigro ochracescente maculato et terminatione rufa non eque lata; tribus autem utrinque ertimis ochracescentibus nigro irregulariter transvittatis: rostro longissimo, brunnescente, apice nigra, basi pallidiore: pedibus nigro-fuscis. Long. tota 11:0, alee 5°7, caudee 2:2, rostri a rictu 3°7, tarsi 1°5. There is an example of this fine large species of Saipe in the British Museum, from Mr. 8. Stevens’s Bogota collection, and MM. Verreaux have also lately transmitted a single specimen to me. It is of about the same size as Temminck’s Scolopax gigantea, but that species appears to have the wings banded. In the present bird the quills are uniform slaty black. The spurious wings and second- aries are edged with buffy white, and all the wing-coverts are termi- nated with the same colour, forming irregular barrings. 23. RALLUS SEMIPLUMBEUS, Sp. nov. ? R. supra brunnescenti-olivaceus, nigro flammulatus ; alis caudaque nigricanti-brunneis ; alarum tectricibus rufis: loris nigris : capi- tis lateribus et corpore toto subtus plumbeis; mento et gulari stria albis : tectricibus subcaudalibus albis nigro miztis: rostri cul- mine et apice nigris ; mandibula autem inferiore ruberrima : pedi- bus pallide brunneis. Long. tota 8°5, alee 4°4, caudee 1°8, rostri 1°7. This is a true Rallus—near R. virginianus of the U.S.—of which MM. Verreaux have sent me a single specimen. I have tried in vain to make it agree with any recognized species, and have therefore provided it with a (temporary ?) name. March 11, 1856.—Dr. Gray, F.R.S., in the Chair. Notre ON PSALTRIA FLAVICEPS, A THIRD AMERICAN SPECIES OF THE PARINE GENUus PSALTRIA. By Puriie Lutytey Scuater, M.A., F.Z.S. In describing a new Conirostrum in these ‘ Proceedings’ for last year (P.Z.S. 1855, p. 74), and giving a list of all the species of that form with which I was acquainted, I took the opportunity of noticing some birds which had been referred to the same genus, which I had not then met with. Among these latter was the Coni- rostrum ornatum of Lawrence, described and figured in the Annals of the Lyceum of Nat. Hist. of New York for 1851. It is only lately that I have been successful in meeting with a specimen of this, I believe, rather rare species. As I had always supposed, I find it has nothing to do with the genus Conirostrum, but has been much more nearly rightly placed by Sundevall, who described it as Zyithalus flaviceps the year before Mr. Lawrence’s name appeared. In my opinion, however, this latter position is not perfectly satisfactory for it. This little bird in fact seems to me to form a very natural member of the Parine genus Psaltria, of which some Asiatic species, including the type, are figured in the seventh Number of Mr. Gould’s great work on the Birds of that continent. Mr. J. S. Gaskoin on a peculiar variety of Mus Musculus. 93 Mr. Cassin, in a very useful Synopsis of the North-American Parine, given in his excellent volume on the Birds of California, Oregon, &c., p. 20, mentions two North-American species of this genus, Psaltria minima and P. melanotis, but says nothing of the present bird, with which he seems to have been unacquainted. Ex- amples of both the former species are contained in the British Museum, and upon comparison agree in every essential character with this bird. It is true that its yellow face and chestnut bend of the wing are quite different in cast of colouring from what we meet with in the other species of this group, and I have little doubt that some naturalists who are fond of coining new names would consider this fact a suffi- cient excuse for making it the type of a new division. But I do myself think that generic characters ought only to be founded upon differences in structure ; and as im the present instance there appears to be none such, I think we shall be quite accurate in registering the present bird as a third American species of the Asiatico-American genus Psaltria under the title of PSALTRIA FLAVICEPS. Agithalus flaviceps, Sund. Ofvers. af Vet. Ac. Foérhand. vii. p- 129 note (1850). Conirostrum ornatum, Lawrence, Ann. Lyc. New York, 1851, p. 113, pl. 5. fig. 1. P. fuscescenti-cinereus, subtus dilutior: pileo et gutture flaves- centibus: campteriis clare castaneis : alis caudaque intus nigri- canti-brunneis : rostro et pedibus nigris: tectricibus subalaribus albis. Long. tota 4°2, alee 2°1, caudee 1:9. Hab. Texas (Lawrence). Note.—Since writing the above, I have been enabled through Mr. Gould’s kindness to compare Psaltria flaviceps with the type of the genus, Psaltria evilis, from Java. It certainly offers a more pointed beak and wing not so rounded as the latter bird, and may be con- sidered as rather aberrant in form. Any naturalist, therefore, who is unwilling to class it with true Psaltria may use for it the generic term Psaltriparus, that name having been bestowed by Prince Bona- parte (Compt. Rend. Ac. Sc. Par. xxxi. p. 478) on Psaltria mela- notis (Sandbach), with which species this bird agrees in every respect. On A PECULIAR VARIETY OF Mus Muscuuws. By Joun S. Gasxorn, F.L.S. Mus Muscutus. Var. Mus nudo-plicatus. I have thus designated this strange and novel form of the genus Mus, to give the more importance to the singularity. In the spring of 1854 a labourer in the employ of Mr. Webster, a tenant on the Taplow-court estate, observed several little white crea- tures running about a straw-rick in the wood at the back of the lodge near Taplow paper-mills, Maidenhead Bridge, and succeeded in 94 Zoological Society :— securing two of them ;—the following day, on moving some of the straw in search of more, he disturbed two others, which he also cap- tured; and disposed of the four to Bond, the Maidenhead Bridge boat- man, for five shillings. Two died during the first night, probably from the rough usage they received when taken ; there remained, to use Bond’s expression, but ‘‘ the old buck and a doe big with kit.” In seven days she brought forth five young ones; and the next day removed from the nest two that were dead; the remainder were reared. One of the existing five was afterwards lost or killed. These little animals were readily recognized as a form of mouse, but of so extraordinary a conformation in their external structure as to attract the curiosity of the immediate neighbourhood, and obtain the not inappropriate name of the rhinoceros mice. The surmise of the people on the spot is, that they had escaped from one of the numerous barges which are constantly arriving at the paper-mills laden with rags, &c., principally of foreign importation. Bond having possessed them four months, offered them for sale to the Zoo- logical Society of London, and the purchase being declined, I bought them, lest so singular a form in natural history should be lost to science and pass into oblivion; and it is to prevent this, that I now beg to record their characters in the ‘ Proceedings’ of this Society. They were shown at the meetings of this and the Linneean Societies, and to many other naturalists; and finally, were exhibited during four months in the small-quadruped house in the gardens of the Society, with the view of eliciting information respecting them, as to any similar conformation in the species or genus haying before been observed ; and expressions of surprise at their novelty of form were in every instance the only remarks obtained. At the period named of their exhibition all had died. Unfortunately they did not breed, although three of them were born, in captivity. In size these animals somewhat exceeded the common mouse, measuring from the tip of the nose to the base of the tail 42,ths inches; they were totally destitute of hairs, excepting some two or three dark-coloured labial hairs, or whiskers; the external integument pinkish white, and formed into coarse prominent plicz, or duplica- tures of itself, transversely traversing the body in an undulated shape, and increasing in width and projection as they descended from the dorsum to the most depending line on either’side of the thorax and abdomen, and there forming pendulous flaps, extending from the arm of the fore to the thighs of the hind legs; so that all the legs being stretched asunder, as when on the wires of the cage, these flaps became expanded in the manner of the flying squirrel. The plicee or duplications of the skin were on the sides of the body in a degree symmetrical ; and on the face and head particularly so; the ears of a dark or blackish colour, the tail ash-coloured, and the eyes black, indicating that they were not albinos of the species. It was curious to observe the quickness and dexterity with which their little paws opened along the furrows formed by the plicee or folds, to clean between them. So dissimilar, it will be observed from the cha- racters given, is the external formation of these animals from that Mr. J. S. Gaskoin on a peculiar variety of Mus Musculus. 95 of the domestic mouse, that opinions were risked as to their con- stituting a different species, but on investigating the teeth of the first one that died, and they proving identical, it was inferred they are a lusus nature of that species ;—if such, however, be the fact, I believe this will prove the first instance on record in which the whole litter or brood of animals or birds, have all been in exactly the same state of abnormal condition, and that condition becoming permanent, and continued through successive generations ; of which we have here the example of two or more generations, and have no knowledge whatever of when this abnormal state may have be- gun ;—for, as in this exemplification, ‘like begets like ’’—“‘ similia similibus gignuntur,”’ it is fair to conclude that the two parents whose progeny resembled them, had also progenitors similar to themselves; especially as they in their breeding, like genuine species in the wild state, associated only with those of their own kind ; thus, if the race be not extinct, successions with the same peculiari- ties will be produced, and give rise to a remarkable example of the origin of a new species, or variety of a species, in the genus. I have made inquiries about the locality where these animals were found, as to whether others had ever been observed there before they were discovered, or have been met with since, and find these to have been the only known instances of their occurrence. I am not aware that in the nests of the Rook, Corvus frugilegus, or the Blackbird, Merula vulgaris (which I mention as being those in whose productions dusus nature are the most frequently noticed), or in the nests of any other bird, more than one individual of a brood has been found, constituted in the healthy condition, and having the plumage white, and the red eye of the true albino ; but variations in colour, &c., may occur in any number, as the results of physical impediments, and not natural production ; however, with increase of strength and health, these generally obtain afterwards their proper-coloured plumage, and are not therefore true lusus nature. 'To quadrupeds I believe the rule equally applies. In consequence of the interesting conversation which followed the reading of the foregoing paper, I think it proper to subjoin a few other observations. The excellent condition and clean appearance of the animals, and their well feeding and activity, left no doubt as to their healthy state during the six months they were alive in my possession and during the four months they were in that of Bond. A Member present stated, that while they were in the Gardens he had mi- croscopically examined the lamelle or branny scales which are ever separating, in larger or smaller particles, from the epidermis of animals, and found them the natural and healthy production. My own examination of these exfoliations had led me to the same opinion. I had the opportunity, and carried my inquiry still further ; I care- fully examined the surface and sections of the dermoid covering with low and with high microscopic powers, and with transmitted light, and as opake objects, with a view to discover any hair-follicles or 96 Zoological Society :— glandular bulbs from which hairs might have emanated, but could not discover a single indication of either, nor any recognizable vestige of their obliteration ;—1 therefore believe the organs for pilous pro- duction were absent, and a6 initio. These little animals having been found in a straw-rick, I conclude, will sufficiently indicate their habits and general residence to be similar to those of the common mouse. Note.—Having recently heard that a specimen of the same variety of Mus that I have described is preserved in the Museum of the College of Surgeons, I compared it with the examples I possess, and found it precisely the same in every character; it was caught by the late Mr. Clift in the fire-place of a room in his house in London, and is entered in the Catalogue of Monsters—‘ No. 121. A common Mouse (Mus Musculus), full-grown, which, from its birth, had not the slightest appearance of hair on its skin, being perfectly naked. Presented by Mr. Clift, 1820.” DESCRIPTION OF THE ANIMALS AND TEETH OF TYLODINA AND OTHER GENERA OF GASTEROPODOUS MOLLUSCA. By Dr. Joun Epwarp Gray, F.R.S., V.P.Z.8., P.B.S. ere. In the followmg paper I forward the description of the animal and the teeth of several genera of Mollusca which have not yet been recorded. It is interesting to find that the examination of the teeth justifies the position which was theoretically assumed for the genera in the different families before their teeth were known. A. PRoOBOSCIDIFERA HAMIGLOSSA. Fam. Muricip2. Fusus paLuipvus (“ F’. turbinelloides= Pyrula lignaria, Reeve’’). The proboscis elongate, cylindrical, subclavate, entirely retractile ; the lingual membrane elongate, narrow, yellow; teeth in three longitudinal series, 1:1°1, the central transparent, provided with a rounded front edge, armed with three rather elongate, conical, sub- equal denticles ; the lateral teeth yellow, versatile, straight, with two compressed arched processes, the terminal one largest, the basal rather smaller, and with a small tooth on its outer edge. The oper- culum is horny, thick, ovate, subtrigonal, annular, as large as the mouth of the shell; the apex blunt, rather worn; the nucleus api- cal, scar large oblong, with a thick callous exterior margin. TyYPHIS TETRAPTERUS. Operculum horny, ovate, blunt, laminar; nucleus anterior, apical, as large as the mouth of the shell, rather broader behind. PISANIA ELEGANS. Panama. The animal pale brown (in spirits) ; the foot folded up and across behind, and together longitudinally in front, leaving a J-shaped groove; tentacles very small; proboscis elongate, thick, clavate, en- tirely retractile ; lingual membrane elongate, thin; teeth in three ~ On the Animals and Teeth of some Gasteropodous Mollusca. 97 longitudinal rows, 1*1°1, central far apart from each other, and the lateral teeth, lunate, with a slightly denticulated, nearly straight, front edge, and a rather strong concave tooth at each end; lateral teeth versatile, large, with a nearly equal basal and apical, conical, curved process. Male organ slender, elongate, tapering, yellow, compressed. Operculum ovate, acute, thick, horny, annular, nucleus apical. TRIUMPHIS DISTORTA. Panama. Lingual membrane elongate ; teeth in three longitudinal series, 1:1-1; central teeth very small, far apart; lateral large, versatile, with two basal unequal, and one larger terminal curved process. Operculum ovate, acute, very thick. ' Cyctope (NAssA) NERITINEA, Nucleus prominent above the surface of the apex of the semi-adult shell, turrited, spiral, dextral, of three or four transversely sulcated flat whorls, with a blunt tip, at length deciduous, leaving a flat, spiral, rather callous scar. The whorls of the shell of the hatched animal — suddenly enlarged, thick ; smooth, spotted, forming a sudden contrast to the whorls of the nucleus. Risso formed a genus, name Nanina, from the young state of the shell. Fam. Buccinip&. CuMA SULCATA. Operculum horny, ovate, triangular, with a deep notch on the middle of the broad side, with a broad callous margin on the inner angular edge of the inner surface. Body and foot with a deep groove on the inner side, formed by the fold on the inner lip of the shell, like the notch in the operculum ; foot folded up behind and together in front, forming a J-shaped groove, with a cross groove in front ; . tentacles close together at the base, diverging, short, compressed, sharp-edged, eyes on the outer side near the tips, which are more -slender and acute above them; proboscis moderately elongate, cylindri- cal, subclavate, completely retractile ; lingual membrane very narrow and elongate, horny; teeth dark-coloured when adult, in three longi- tudinal series, 1:1°1,; the central teeth broad, transverse, about half the width of the lingual membrane, with seven distant conical denticulations on the front edge, the central denticle forming a con- tinued central ridge, the lateral denticulations unequal, the central of the three larger, the outer one on the outer margin of the tooth ; the lateral teeth small, conical, curved, acute, versatile with a simple rather elongate base. B. OpoNTOGLOsSA. Fam. FAScIOLARIADZ. FASCIOLARIA SALMO. Operculum ovate, acute, smooth, slightly concentrically wrinkled ; apex of this individual reproduced and rather rounded. Animal bright Ann. & Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 2. Vol, xix. 7 Ter §.y . Loological Society :— red; foot, when contracted, folded together transversely behind and longitudinally in front ; tentacles small, compressed, subulate, united together at the base, forming a small veil; eyes on the outer side, rather above the base, with a conical tentacle only slightly produced above the eyes; proboscis very long, slender, entirely retractile; lingual membrane very long, slender, with three longitudinal series of teeth in cross lines, 1*1°1, the central teeth.narrow, square, with three small, subequal, acute denticulations, the central one rather the longest ; the lateral teeth very broad, slightly arched, and more arched at the outer end, with a series of twenty-five or thirty equal, regular, elongate, subulate teeth, somewhat like the teeth of a coarse hair- comb; the central teeth are opposite the space between the lateral teeth, that is, alternating with them. Male organ elongate, subcylin- drical, compressed, of the same diameter the whole length, rounded at the end with a slight groove on its outer edges, which is not con- tinued up the body as in Malea, LEUCOZONIA ANGULATA. Animal red; the foot, when contracted, folded up across behind, and longitudinally in front, leaving a J-shaped groove ; tentacles close together at their base, diverging, flat, with the eyes on the outer side rather below the tip, which is narrower and acute; pro- boscis completely ‘retractile, clavate; lingual membrane elongate, rather narrow; teeth in three longitudinal series, the central series rather narrower than the lateral ones, square, with a rather arched anterior edge, with elongate, conical, acute denticulations, the central denticulation being the largest and longest; the lateral teeth bandlike, rather oblique, front edge with several distinct, conical, acute den- ticulations, the one at the edge of the inner margins near the central tooth being much the largest and longest; operculum ovate, acute, thick ; nucleus apical. C. TA#NIOGLOSSA. Fam. Do.iup2Z. The proboscis of this family is very long, large, and more or less dilated, with an open rather trumpet-like mouth at the end. MALEA RINGENS. Animal like Dolium. Lingual membrane narrow, elongate, wider in front; teeth in seven longitudinal series, dark red, in each cross series, 3°1°3; the central teeth broad, lunate, thin, with a central recurved apex, and sometimes a small denticle for each side, halfway between the tooth and the end; the lateral teeth subulate, curved, acute at the top; cervical collar of two ovate, horny plates, covered with crowded converging subulate teeth; foot short, truncated in front, rounded behind; proboscis cylindrical, large, retractile into a sheath under the tentacular veil; mouth open at the end; tentacles subulate ; eyes on short tubercles at the outer hinder side. Male organ very large, compressed, with marginal groove on the outer side, continued up the right side of the body by the side of the rectum, On the Animals and Teeth of some Gasteropodous Mollusca. 99 and with a slender filiform appendage near the tip. Operculum none. Fam. TRITONIADZ. The animals of this family are intermediate in character between the Proboscidifere and the Rostrifere. The proboscis is larger and thicker than in the other families of the Proboscidifere, is not so much retracted, and is contained in a more free sheath, and the end of the retracted trunk is often partly exposed beyond the margin of the sheath, giving the animal somewhat the external appearance of the Rostrifere, and explaining why some of the French figures of the animals of Triton, Ranella, &c. are represented as if they be- longed to that division of the Gasteropods. RANELLA CELATA. Tentacles lateral, separated by a short, rather broad, truncated tubular veil; eyes on the outer side rather above the base; proboscis _ short, very large and thick, retracted to the edge of the veil, leaving the two rounded pale processes of its apex exposed, forming with the veil a rostrum-like projection, very unlike the elongate, slender, cylindrical retracted proboscis of Murex, Purpura, &c.; lingual membrane narrow, elongate; teeth in seven series, 3°1°3, close together, rather crowded, the central rather narrow, with a central prominent denticle, having a smaller one on each side of the base ; the lateral teeth subulate, curved. ScUTIBRANCHIATA RHIPIDOGLOSSA. Fam. TurRBINID&. Imperator, n.s.? Panama. Eye-pedicel thick ; tentacles elongate, slender ; frontal lappets trun- cated, broad at the base, about 1 the width of the forehead; foot folded longitudinally behind and transversely in front; lateral fringe of the right side most distinct; muzzle produced, annulated ; lingual membrane elongate, rather narrow, linear, dark brown; central teeth 5:1°5, the middle one broad, the side ones narrower, square, all with a SSeNT Tee tip ; the lateral teeth numerous, ‘hairlike, the inner one wider. CALLOPOMA SAXOSUM. Panama. Foot folded across in the middle; back with a hoodlike process covering the front part of the operculum, and depositing the external callosity of it; eyes on short thick pedicels; tentacles linear, at the upper edge of the eye-pedicel; frontal lappet truncated, narrow at the base, at the inner side of the base of the tentacles ; lateral fringe on each side, with three beards on the middle of the edge ; lingual membrane broad, elongate; central series 5:1°5; the central broad, with a recurved tip, the lateral one more narrow, equal ; the lateral teeth numerous, hairlike. . 7% 100 Zoological Society :— Fam. TrRocuip&. TEGULA PELLIS SERPENTIS. Panama. Operculum horny, thin, orbicular, of many narrow, gradually en- larging whorls ; foot folded together longitudinally when contracted ; eyes on thin elongated pedicels; tentacles linear, sheathed at the base by the inner part of the base of the eye-pedicels ; frontal lappet none ; lateral fringe of left side distinct, with three beards just be- neath it; lingual membrane elongate, broad; teeth in ten longi- tudinal series, in arched cross rows, elongate, with a rounded apex ; lateral teeth linear, crowded, arched at the end. Order PLEUROBRANCHIATA. . Fam. APLYSIADZ. APLYSIA DEPILANS ? Genoa. The small, polished, subglobular spiral (sinistral?) nucleus or apex of the older shell is, with the subapical part of the shell, co- vered with a membranaceous reflection of the inner lip over its sur- face, which is only slightly adherent to the surface of the shell and nucleus, and easily removed from it, but which gradually becomes thicker ; the top of the shell appears to be absorbed, or more or less obliterated in the older specimens. According to Mr. Woodward, Mr. Hancock has observed in the adult specimen two or three shells one within the other, like the Loli- gines or-Sea slaves. Fam. TyLODINAD. TYLODINA PUNCTULATA= TZ". Rafinesquii, Philippi. Lingual membrane very broad, brown ; teeth small, uniform, very numerous, in very numerous longitudinal lines, forming straight con- tinued uniform lines across the membrane, with an indistinct central line; the tentacles subulate, slit on the outer side; the lips are produced and acute on each side, and twisted, leaving a slight cavity on the outer side of the tip; the mantle is thin, free all round the edge and slightly thickened just within the margin, rather thicker and more free over the front of the back; the gill is single on the hinder part of the right side just under the mantle, attached the whole of its length on the inner side by a central ridge to the side of the body; the outer side is furnished with a rather thick, somewhat zigzag central vessel, giving out pinnated vascular branches, nearly alternating with each other on each side of the great vessel; the foot is larger than the mantle and shell, expanded, rounded behind, truncated in front and slightly emarginate in the centre under the mouth; the sexual aperture not visible in the specimen in spirits. Shell conic, patelloid, thin, slightly pearly within, with a thin, hard, horny periostraca, which is produced beyond the edge of the shell, and radiately coloured, in the dry state brittle, hard, and contracted; the apex (of the shell) subcentral, with a rather pro- duced polished top, nucleus subglobose, with a slightly convex spire On the Animals and Teeth of some Gasteropodous Mollusca. 101 of one and a half or two rapidly enlarging subconvolute whorls ; aperture ovate, rather irregular, slightly dilated on the right side ; cavity simple; muscular scar subannular, with an angular inflection rather behind the middle of the right side, the form of the scar is varia- ble, sometimes square, broad all round; in the larger, more developed specimens the scar is rather horse-shoe shaped, being somewhat dilated at the front part of each side, and the front portion over the back of the head is narrow, linear, and transverse. The genus was first established by Rafinesque in 1814 ; Blainville, who only knew it from Rafinesque’s imperfect descriptions, referred it to the Patelloida, but Menke, Philippi and Cantraine properly con- sidered it allied to Pleurobranchus, and especially Umdrella, and ve _ lately Dr. Lovén stated that it was allied to Turbonella (Index Moll. Scand. 19). The examination of the teeth proves it to belong to the typical Pleurobranchiata, and the form and position of the gill shows its affinity with the genera Pleurobranchus and Umbrella ; indeed it chiefly differs from the former genus in having an external conic patelloid shell, and from the latter ia the head being produced and the mouth not sunken in a deep anterior pit. In the British Museum there are two species of this genus. 1. T. punctulata, Rafin., 7. Rafinesquii, Philippi, 7. citrina, Joannis, Guérin, Mag. Zool. i. t. 36. Shell thin, whitish; periostraca hard, opake, with dark brown rays. Mediterranean. 2. T. atlantica= Umbrella mediterranea? MacAndrew, Ann. Nat. Hist. Shell solid, bright yellow; periostraca—? N. Atlantic, Madeira. Fam. UMBRELLADZ. UMBRELLA MEDITERRANEA. The nucleus of this genus is very like that of T'ylodina, subglobose, polished, sinistral, of one and a half or almost two subcylindrical, ra- pidly enlarging whorls ; the adult shell is irregular in the outline and rather expanded on the hinder part of the right side, over the gills; the muscular scar is annular, continued, and of nearly uniform breadth, but slightly imterrupted in various parts. The chief dif- ference between the shell of Z'ylodina and Umérella is, that the shell of the former is more elevated, very thin, covered with a hard, rather paleaceous periostraca, and the muscular scar is furnished with an angular inflation on the hinder parts of the right side; a sinistral nucleus is found on several others; shells as in the genera of Pyra- midellide. Fam. PRosERPINID. PROSERPINA. Respiratory cavity open; mantle free from the back of the neck, with a double edge, the outer one rather reflexed ; foot moderate, 102 _ Miscellaneous. truncated in front, acute, and keeled above behind; muzzle short, truncated, annulated, with a triangular inferior mouth ; tentacles 2, lateral, far apart, tapering and acute; eyes moderate, sessile, at the outer side of the base of the tentacles ; the front part of the back of the foot concave, surrounded by a continuation of the mantle, form- ing a fleshy submarginal fringe, which is fuller (when contracted in spirits), crumpled and folded on itself on the left side. Operculum none. _ — os MISCELLANEOUS. PORTRAIT OF DR. JOHNSTON. In our Number for September 1855, we gave a short notice of the life and labours of Dr. George Johnston of Berwick-uwpon-Tweed, who was one of the Editors of this Journal from its commencement to the day of his death. Although so long a time has elapsed since the lamented decease of this distinguished zoologist, we hope that the excellent portrait of him which we have the pleasure of presenting to our readers as the Frontispiece to the present volume of the ‘Annals’ may not prove unacceptable. Those who were acquainted with the late Dr. Johnston will recognize in it an excellent likeness | of that amiable and talented naturalist, in which even the benignity of expression which peculiarly characterized him has been most faithfully preserved. | ) _ The portrait, which is copied from an excellent daguerreotype by Mr. Claudet, taken in 1850, was kindly lent to us for this purpose by Dr. Gray of the British Museum, and has been executed by Mr. Robert Hicks. It is admirably done, and ought to add greatly to the reputation of this talented young engraver. | On the Occurrence of some new species of Pollicipes in the Inferior Oolite and Lias of Gloucestershire. By the Rev. P. B. Bropis, M.A., F.G.S, Mr. Darwin in his valuable and interesting Monograph on the Fos- - sil Lepadide, published in the Memoirs of the Paleeontographical Society for 1851, observes, that “the oldest known edunculated Cirripede is a Pollicipes, discovered by Professor Buckman in the Stonesfield Slate.’ Since the publication of Mr. Darwin’s memoir, I discovered the remains of a Pollicipes in the Inferior Oolite at Selsley Hill near Stroud, in Gloucestershire, a locality which has afforded many new and interesting fossils, for which we are indebted to the able and active researches of my friend Mr, Lycett. Two valves of the seutum are entire, but the other three are too fragmentary to decide to which of the other valves they may have belonged. On comparing the scutum with the same valve in Polli- cipes ooliticus, of the Stonesfield Slate, there is a marked difference Miscellaneous. 108 between them, so that, in all probability, this will prove to be a distinct species; but this I hope Mr. Darwin will be able to de- termine. Another and probably a different species has been found by Mr. Gavey at Chippmg Campden in Gloucestershire, in the top beds of the lower Lias, which are very prolific in organic remains wherever they occur. As the Cirripedes are usually rare in a fossil state, especially in the Oolites and Lias, it seemed desirable to notify the existence of some species of Lepadidée during these geological periods, _ —a somewhat earlier date than the one previously indicated. MR. YARRELL’S COLLECTIONS. Our readers will be gratified to learn, that the Trustees of the British Museum have secured for the Museum the collection of British Fish, and all the specimens of Birds and other animals illustrating Mr. Yarrell’s various papers in the Transactions of the Linneean and Zoological Societies, at the sale of his property. On the Stereognathus Ooliticus, from the Stonesfield Slate. By Prof. Owen, F.R.S., F.G.S. The subject of this paper was a small mammal, represented by a fragment of a lower jaw retaining three molar teeth, which was ob- tained by the Rev. J. Dennis from the Stonesfield-slate of Oxford- shire, and named Stereognathus Ooliticus by Mr. E. Charlesworth. _ This specimen, described in detail by Prof. Owen at the British As- sociation Meeting in September last, indicated, in the author’s opi- nion, an animal allied to some extinct genera of even-toed Pachy- derms, viz. the Hyracotherium, Microtherium, and Hyopotamus of the Tertiary deposits; and he concluded therefore that the Stereognathus was most probably a diminutive non-ruminant Artiodactyle of omni- vorous habits. With regard to the zoological reasons for referring this peculiar and ancient fossil to the type of animal form above alluded to, the Professor entered at some length into the analysis of the mental pro- cesses by which the paleontologist aims at the restoration of an unknown mammal from such a fragment as the fossil under notice. ‘Its mammalian character is decided by the two-fanged implantation of the teeth, and its pachydermatous affinities are evidenced by the ‘peculiar sex-cuspid and cingulated molars. ‘These zoological rela- tions are determined from the knowledge that such structural pecu- diarities obtain in certain known Pachydermata. Morphology, there- fore, or the study of form, rather than physiology, or the known relation of organs to function, is the guide in this determination ; but the Professor expressed his opinion that this example could not be cited as showing that there is no physiological, comprehensible, or rational law (in contradistinction to the morphological or empiri- _ cal) which can be a guide inthe determination of fossil remains. 104 Miscellaneous. He did not think that all such determinations rest upon the applica- tion of observed coincidences of structure, for which coincidences no reason can be rendered ; for, although in many instances of this law of correlation, as demonstrated by comparative anatomy, the sufficient or physiological cause of them is not known; yet, in other instances, the application of the principle has been suc- cessfully illustrated. The truth or fact (said Prof. Owen) of.a phy- siological knowledge of a correlated structure, and of the applica- tion of that knowledge to paleontology, is not affected or de- stroyed by instances adduced from that much more extensive series of correlated structures of which the physiological condition is not yet known.—Proc. Geol. Soc. Noy. 5, 1856. Note on Estheria minuta. By T. Rurert Jones, Esq., Assist. Sec. G.S. Not long since the Rev. W. Symonds favoured me with some well- preserved specimens of this little Triassic fossil; and, with Prof. J. Quekett’s kind assistance, I was enabled to see most distinctly the true Crustacean character of the tissue of its valves. This confirmed an opinion I had long held that this fossil is not a Mollusk, but closely allied to the Limnadia, Limnetis, and Estheria *, bivalved: phyllopodous Crustaceans (Zntomostraca) of the present day ; ; and indeed, as far as the carapace-valves are concerned, it well represents the Estheria of Rippell and Baird + (Isaura, Joly). In the Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. (1847) vol. iil. p. 274, Sir C. Lyell figured a similar fossil from the coal-shales of Eastern Virginia, and remarked that, with Mr. Morris, he doubted whether the so-called ** Posidonomya’’ may not be a Crustacean rather than a Mollusk f. Similar fossils, of different species, occur in the Devonian rocks (Caithness and Orkney), Carboniferous (Northumberland), Liassic (Skye and Gloucestershire), Oolitic (Scarborough), Purbeck (Dorset), and Wealden (Sussex). Others are met with in the Jurassic Coal-fields of North Carolina and Virginia §, and along their north-eastern ex- tension, forming the so-called ‘‘ New Red Sandstone”’ of Virginia and Pennsylvania ||; in the plant-bearing sandstones of Central India { (Nagpur and Mangali) ; and in the Triassic deposits of Europe. * This is the little Triassic shell that has been termed Posidonia and Posido- nomya minuta: Posidonia minuta, (Alberti) Goldfuss, Petref. Germ. p. 118. t. 113. f.5; Posidonomya minuta, Bronn, Leth. Geog. p. 164. t. 11. f. 22 ; Zieten, Verst. Wiirttemb. p. 72. t. 54. f.5; Strickland, Geol. Trans. 2 ser. vol. v. p. 338. t. 28. f.4. In Morris’s ‘ Catalogue of British Fossils,’ 2nd edit. 1854, it is included in the Crustacea (as Estheria minuia) ; but (apparently from inadvertence) it has not been expunged from the list of Mollusks in that work. t Proc. Zool. Soc. part 17. p. 86. t See also Lyell’s ‘ Manual of Geology,’ 5th edit. p. 332. § Lyell, loc. cit.; and W. B. Rogers, Boston Nat. Hist. Soc. Proc. v. p. 15. || Continuous with the Sandstones of New Jersey, and most probably with those of Connecticut also: Rogers, loc. cit. § Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xi. p. 370. Miscellaneous. ‘105 Although occurring so constantly in the different geological pe- riods, from the Devonian to the Wealden*, and again in the recent marine and fresh waters, yet it is in the Triassic deposits of England and the Continent, in the sandstones and shales of Virginia and Pennsylvania, and in the plant-bearing beds of Virginia and Central India, that this little bivalved Entomostracan appears to be pre- eminently abundant; so as to serve probably as a faithful index of a peculiar geological horizon+. In like manner, among the still lower forms of life, the Nummu- lite is represented in the Siluriant, Carboniferous, Liassic, and Oolitic rocks, and exists also at the present day ; but it particularly distinguished one epoch (the Tertiary) by a surprising fecundity and a temporary profusion of individuals. The occurrence of a fossil Hstheria in the Upper Sandstone and Shale of the Scarborough district (HZ. concentrica, Bean §, sp.) is of interest, as being indicative of the association of this Crustacean with the Oolitic flora in England, as it isin India and America. In India a Triassic Labyrinthodont Reptile (Brachiops laticeps||) is found in the same strata as yield the Hstheria at Mangali and the plants at Nagpur; and in Pennsylvania reptilian remains occur with the so-called ‘ Posidonia”’: in America indeed the evidence seems to point to a contemporaneity of the Virginian plant-beds, the shales and sandstones of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, the foot- marked sandstones of Connecticut, and the upper red sandstone of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward’s Island, which is also reptilife- rous**; and it is evident that in the Virginian and Pennsylvanian shales the minute Crustaceans under notice are important fossils. The plants of Nagpur and Virginia having a Jurassic facies, like those of Scarborough, it will be interesting, as further evidences turn up, to see how far we are to regard the Triassic or the Jurassic element as preponderating, or whether a passage-group of deposits are indicated by the evidence,—or, lastly, whether these Plant-beds with Reptiles and Crustaceans indicate the terrestrial and lacustrine conditions only of the early secondary period. The Jurassic flora of Australia++ and that of Southern Africa have been hitherto collected without affording any clear traces of the Listheria. The latter country, however, has its probably Triassic * [have no satisfactory evidence of the presence of the genus in question in the Cretaceous and Tertiary deposits. tT Prof. W. B. Rogers has already pointed out (Joc. cit.) the probable value of this little fossil in the comparison of the Mesozoic rocks of North Carolina and Virginia, and of these with the so-called Triassic beds of the United States. ~ Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist. ser. 2. vol. xv. p. 58. § Mag. Nat. Hist. ix. p. 376. || Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. ix. p. 37 & 371. q Lea on Clepsysaurus Pennsylwanicus, Journ. Acad. N. Sc. Philad. n. s. vol. ii. _p. 185; and on Centemodon sulcatus, Proc. Ac. N. Sc. Philad. vol. viii. p. 77. aie on Bathygnathus borealis, Journ. Acad. N. Sc. Philad. n. s. vol. ii. p. 327. : Tt See M‘Coy’s paper, Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist. vol. xx. p. 145, &c. 106 Miscellaneous. Reptile, the Dicynodon, imbedded with this flora* ;—so that the peculiar association above-indicated for India and North America obtains there also. In pointing out these facts of the geological and geographical dis- tribution of the fossil Hstheria, I merely touch upon the salient points of an interesting subject of research,—for the elucidation of which careful inquiry at home and abroad is still requisite. p In conclusion, although the recent Hstheria is a marine Crustacean, yet, since very closely allied forms are of freshwater habits, and since among bivalved Entomostracans different species of a genus and even the individuals of a species occasionally live either in marine or in fresh water, there is no certain evidence afforded by the fossil in question whether the so-called Triassic deposits in which it is found were formed in rivers, lakes, or seas.—Journal of the Geological Society for November 1856. On the Genus Cuma, By C. Spence Bare, F.L.S. The study of the Diastylide certainly led in my mind to a very different conclusion from that which, judging from the remarks in the September Number of Silliman’s Journal, it has produced in Prof. Agassiz’. I think, moreover, that since he admits the Diastylis Rathkii to be an. adult animal, because it has been taken with young, he must have overlooked Mr. Goodsir’s statement, that he had taken Cuma Scorpioides+ (Mont.) with spawn (ova), which he describes as very large and of a bright straw colour. This appears to be an argument of equal force to prove that Cuma is adult. In my humble judgment, the fact of Prof. Agassiz having taken his specimens from Macroura, is evidence that they could not be Cume—that is, the genus of Edwards and Goodsir. With regard to the affinity between the young of Macroura and Cuma, I append a portion of an interesting letter which I received from R. Q. Couch, Esq., whose knowledge of the larval forms of the decapod Crustacea is second to no living carcinologist. I have taken the liberty to italicise one passage :— ** Penzance, August 11th, 1856. “T have been very much occupied on the larval state of our decapod Crustaceans, in furtherance of a re-examination of the whole subject. It cannot be a matter of surprise that the genera Cuma, Alauna, Bodotria, &c. should a priori be thought to be the young of the higher Crustacea. I confess I suspected it myself for some time, but gave it up many months ago, and my opinions are fully confirmed by the valuable observations in your paper. My views were grounded on the fact, that I never met with any of these forms * Trans. Geol. Soc, 2nd series, vol. vii. part 4. p. 227, note. t+ It must be remembered that in the species Cuma Scorpioides of Montagu, I have included the C. Audowinti of Edwards and the C. Edwardsit of Goodsir.. | i 3 | yee a Miscellaneous. 107 in any of the larval conditions of the Crustacea of Cornwall, though the number I have examined is great. « Even the alternations of generations will not serve in this matter ; for if I understand aright, you have examined the young and find them like the adult, while I have examined the great majority of our Decapods without once detecting the strange forms of these genera among them. Ch BDH * Avassiz’ assertion must be taken with limitation, or he has been altogether deceived, so far as British observations would indicate. «“T have carefully examined the Zoé condition of H. varians, Pri- deauxiana, and Cranchii, and find they are all totally unlike Cuma and the kindred genera. We must not generalize too quickly. Agassiz’? specimens, it must be remembered, were American ; still I should not expect that kindred species would differ so widely as they must, if his observations are correct.” RARE BRITISH BIRDS. To the Editors of the Annals of Natural History. Falmouth, December 13, 1856. GENTLEMEN,—On Thursday last, a specimen of the Thalassi- droma Leachii, Selby, in an exhausted state, was captured by a ship- wright near the bar. It is in the possession of Mr. Chapman, taxi- dermist. Two specimens of the Lutra vulgaris, Desm., were shot by Mr. Wm. Holder, at the Swanpool, on Wednesday night last. One measured 4 feet long, and weighed 21 pounds; the other 34 feet long, and 16 pounds. ; I am, Gentlemen, yours truly, W. P. Cocks. Note on Zootoca vivipara v. nigra, Gray, Cat. Rept. B. M. 28. Mr. Thomas Hopley has lately presented to the British Museum a black specimen of Zootoca vivipara, which was caught by a young friend, Mr. Fritz Noel Mackay, near Eastbourn, Sussex. Mr. Hopley states that the variety is permanent in that neigh- bourhood, but nowhere common. The Black Lizard has only hitherto been recorded in our fauna as found in Ireland. It is not uncommon in some districts in Germany, but appears local. It is regarded as a distinct species by Wolf, and well figured under the name of Laceréa nigra in Sturm’s beautiful ‘ Fauna Germanica.’ Po fA E. Gray. : On a new Turkey, Meleagris mexicana. By J. Gouxp, Esq., F.R.S. &e. In the lapse of time the origin of several of the animals which man has subjected to his dominion, and which are of the greatest service 108 Miscellaneous. to his necessities or his pleasures, has become involved in obscurity. As instances in point we may cite among quadrupeds the Camel, the Horse, the Dog, &c., and among birds the various Gallinacee, Ana- tide and Columbida, all of which were derived from Asia. ‘The pro- ductions of the New World have not yielded such ready obedience to his sway, since no one of its quadrupeds has yet been domesticated, and only one of its birds—the Turkey; but a like fate, if I mistake not, has attended the origin of this solitary acquisition, which, although the bird has not been known to us more than 300 years, is equally wrapped in uncertainty. **So involved in obscurity,’ says Mr. Martin, “is the early history of the Turkey, and so ignorant do the writers of the six- teenth and seventeeth centuries appear to have been about it, that they have regarded it as a bird known to the ancients by the name of ‘ Meleagris,’ namely, the Guinea-fowl or Pintado, a mistake which was not cleared up until the middle of the eighteenth century. The appellation of Turkey which the bird bears in our country, arose, according to Willoughby, from a supposition that it came originally from the country so called. Mexico was first discovered by Grijalva in 1518. Oviedo speaks of the Turkey as a kind of peacock abound- ing in New Spain, which had already, in 1526, been transported in a domestic state to the islands and the Spanish Main, where it was kept by the Christian colonists. It is reported to have been intro- - duced into England in 1524, and is enumerated as among the dainties of the table in 1541. In 1573 it had become the customary Christ- mas fare of the farmer.”” Every author who has written on the subject since the days of Linnzus has considered it to be derived from the well-known wild Turkey of North America, but on account of the great differences which are met with among our domestic Turkeys, and the circumstance of the wild Turkeys recently imported from North America not readily associating or pairing with them, I have for some years past entertained a contrary opmion. This opinion may be met by some persons with the remark, that similar and even greater differences occur among our domestic poultry. True—but I believe that these differences are due to an admixture of two, three, or more species, and that in no case would the domestication of a single species produce characters so decided as those exhibited by the two birds now exhibited. In Canada and the United States the Turkey is partially migra- tory, visiting those countries during the summer, for the purpose of breeding, and although some writers state that it is a native of Mexico, I can hardly think it likely that it ranges very far south in the latter country, for, from the southern boundary of Canada to Mexico is nearly 2000 miles, and it is unlikely, I think, that a bird of the cold regions of Canada should also be indigenous to the hotter country of Mexico, whence, and not from North America, the Turkey was originally introduced into Europe by the Spaniards early in the sixteenth century. | Believing this bird to be distinct from the North American species, Miscellaneous. 109° it becomes necessary that one of them should receive a new name, and a question then arises to which of the two should it be given. My opinion is, that it will be better to retain the term Gallopavo for the North American species, and to call the present one mexicana, after the country of which it is a native. Linneeus’ Meleagris Gallo- pavo is founded upon the Gallopavo sylvestris of Brisson’s ‘ Ornitho- logie,’ vol. i. p. 162, and upon Ray’s New England Wild Turkey, both of which names appertain to the North American species; consequently the term mexicana would be a fit appellation for the present bird. I may mention, that it is the only example of a Turkey I have ever seen from Mexico, and that it was brought to this country by the late Mr. Floresi, a gentleman whose energy as a collector was only equalled by the honourable career of a moderately long life, during which he was connected with the Real del Monte mines in Mexico. Mr. Floresi travelled himself, and kept collectors, who penetrated into the remotest parts of that country ; and many were the fine species he by this means communicated to the world of science. I may mention the splendid Picus imperialis, Calurus neoxenus, and many Humming Birds, as some of the species which but for his researches would have been unknown to us. In size this new Turkey exceeds that of the largest specimens of the North American species ; but it has shorter legs, a considerably larger and more broadly expanded tail, conspicuously zoned with brown and black, and terminated with white ; the tail-coverts are very pro- fusely developed, largely tipped with white, and bounded posteriorly with a narrow line of black, their basal portions being rich metallic bronze. The same arrangement of colouring also prevails on the feathers of the lower part of the flanks ; and on the under tail-coverts, where it is particularly fine; the centre of the back is black, with green, purplish and red reflexions; the back of the neck, upper part of the back, and shoulders, are in some lights bronzy, in others the colour of fire ; the greater wing-coverts are uniform bronzy brown, forming a conspicuous band across the wing; all the primaries are crossed by mottled bars of blackish brown and white, freckled with brown ; all the under surface is fiery copper, intensely brilliant in certain lights, and becoming darker towards the flanks. Total length 4 feet 4 inches ; bill 24 inches ; wing 213 inches; tail 16 inches, and when spread about 24 inches across ; tarsi 63. In the Report of an expedition down the Zuni and Colorado Rivers by Captain L. Sitgreaves, lately published in America, the following passage occurs at p. 94, in reference to Wild Turkeys :— “They are also found in New Mexico, in the neighbourhood of the copper-mines. I am told by our officers that those found there are of enormous size. Mr. Leroux, our guide, informed me that the Turkeys of the Gila River were different from those found east of the Rio Grande, and that they have much white about them.” These are doubtless identical with the bird under consideration. Since the above remarks were in type, I have been informed by J. H. Gurney, Esq., M.P., that he some years since received the skin of a Wild Turkey from the neighbourhood’ of the Real’ del 110 Miscellaneous. Monte mines in Mexico, which he considers to he the same as the bird above described; this specimen is now in the Museum at Norwich,—Proc. Zool. Soc., April 8, 1856. Description of a new Trogon and a new Odontophorus. By Joun Gov tp, Esq., F.R.S., &e. _ TROGON AURANTIIVENTRIS, Gould. _ Male: Forehead, face and chin dull black; head, sides of the neck, breast, back and upper tail-coverts golden-green ; wings slaty- black, the coverts and secondaries finely freckled, and the primaries margined at the base with white; two centre tail-feathers bronzy- green, narrowly tipped with black ; the two next on each side bronzy- green on their outer webs, the inner webs and the tips black ; three outer tail-feathers on each side black, crossed by numerous narrow bars of, and narrowly tipped with, white ; under surface rich orange; separated from the green of the chest by a semilunar mark of whites thighs black ; bill orange ; feet dark grey. Total length, 10 inches ; bill, £; wing, 52; tail, 6. Female: Head, all the upper surface and breast orange-brown ; wing-coverts brown, minutely freckled with brownish-black ; abdo- men pale orange ; two central tail-feathers reddish-brown, narrowly tipped with black ; the two next on each side brown on their outer webs, the interior ‘webs and tips black ; three lateral feathers black at the base, their outer webs and apical portions white, minutely freckled with black, and a narrow irregular band of black near the ti Ptab. near David, Veragua. Remark,—This species is very closely allied to Trogon puella, being precisely similar in every character, except that of the colour- ing of the breast, which is orange instead of scarlet; both these species are remarkable for the regularity of the markings of their tail-feathers, and for the markings extending to the tip. } ODONTOPHORUS VERAGUENSIS, Gould. Male: Crown of the head and crest dark rust-red ; throat black, with a line of white down the centre of each feather; back reddish- brown, freckled with black, and a faint line of white down the centre of each feather; wings brown, mottled and freckled with black, and with a small indistinct spot of buff near the tip of each of the coverts ; scapularies brown, with a light stripe down the centre, and with a large blotch of brownish-black near the apex of the inner web ; rump pale brown, obscurely spotted with black; under surface light cho- colate-brown, with a spot of white more or less encircled with black near the tip of each feather. Female: Differs in having the forehead and upper feathers of the crest slaty-brown ; and the spots on the breast smaller and less con- spicuous. Total length, 10 inches; bill, 3; wing, 5$; tail, 23; tarsi, 14. Hab. Veragua. : Meteorological Observations. 1hl Remark.—This species is nearly allied to Odontophorus guttatus,--- - but differs in the lighter colouring of the breast and the redder hue of the crest. Specimens were procured by Dr. Seemann at Panama, and by Mr. Bridges from near David in ghee —Proe. Zool. Soc. May 13, 1856. METEOROLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS FOR Nov. 1856. Chiswick.—Noyember 1. Uniform haze: cloudy. 2. Foggy: cloudy: hazy. 3. Uniformly overcast: very fine. 4. Foggy: very fine. 5. Foggy: light clouds: fine: frosty. 6. Frosty, clear and cold: cloudy. 7. Cloudy: overcast : densely clouded. 8. Densely clouded: rain. 9. Clear: cloudy and fine. 10. Slight rain. 11. Fine, but cold: cloudy and cold. 12. Cloudy: white clouds and clear inter- vals. 13. Fine, but cold: rain. 14. Clear and cold. 15. Frosty: fine: slight rain. 16. Clear and frosty: fine: sharp frost. 17. Frosty and foggy : dense fog throughout. 18. Slight fog: very fine: rain. 19. Rain: very fine. 20. Densely clouded. 21. Drizzly: hazy: cloudy. 22. Overcast: cloudy and mild. 23. Uni- formly overcast: cloudy and fine. 24. Cloudy and fine. 25. Densely overcast : clear, cold, and dry. 26. Hazy: rain and sleet. 27. Very fine. 28. Cloudy: hazy : cloudy. 29. Sharp frost : clear: frosty. 30. Sharp frost: clear: fine. Mean temperature of the month ...........ceeeecessseereeeeeees . 39°30 ° Mean temperature of Nov. 1855 ...... Socks apie reregese négeine sil cok Mean temperature of Nov. for the last thirty years ae Ae » 42°93 Average amount of rain in NOV. .ssssseeesee pimetapnes tare seenee 2°313 inches. Boston.—Novy. 1. Cloudy: rain a.m. 2,3. Cloudy. 4. Foggy. 5. Cloudy. 6,7. Fine. 8. Cloudy: rain a.m. and p.m. 9,10. Fine, 1). Cloudy: rain p.m. 12. Cloudy: rain a.m. and p.m. 13. Cloudy. 14—16. Fine. 17. Cloudy. 18. Fine: rain a.m. 19. Cloudy: rain a.m. 20. Fine. 21. Cloudy. 22. Fine: rain A.M. 23. Cloudy. 24. Fine: rainp.m. 25. Fine. 26. Fine: snow a.m. 27. Cloudy. 28,29. Fine. 30. Fine: snow p.m. Sandwick Manse, Orkney.—Nov. 1. Clear, fine a.m.: cloudy, fine p.m. 2. Showers a.M.andp.m. 3. Bright a.m.: cloudy p.m. 4, Cloudy a.m. :’clear, fine, aurora P.M. 5. Fog a.m.: cloudy p.m. 6. Hazy, fine a.m.: clear, fine p.m. 7. Hazy, fine a.M.: fine, drops p.m. 8, Showers a.m.: cloudy, dropsp.m. 9. Showers A.M.: sleet-showers P.M. 10. Snow-showers a.m,: sleet-showers p.m. 11. Snow-showers A.M.: hail-showers p.m. 12. Cloudy a.m.: clearp.m. 13. Showers A.M.: hail-showers P.M. 14. Snow-showers A.M.: hail-showers p.m. 15. Showers A.M.: snow-showers P.M. 16. Cloudy a.m.: drizzle p.m. 17. Showers a.m. and p.m. 18, Cloudy a.m.: showers p.m. 19, Showers a.m.: cloudy p.m. 20. Cloudy a.m.: drizzle p.m. 21. Drizzle a.m.: rain p.m. 22. Rain a.m.: drizzle p.m. 23. Dampa.m.: drizzlep.m. 24. Drops a.M.: hail-showers, drift p.m. 25. Snow-showers a.M.: cloudy p.m. 26. Cloudy a.m.: rain p.m. 27. Showers A.M.: snow-showers P.M. 28. Hail-showers a.m. and p.M. 29. Hail-showers A.M. : hail-showers, drift p.m. 30. Bright a.m.: hail-showers p.m. Mean temperature of Nov. for previous twenty-nine years ... 42°67 Mean temperature of this month ......... Me eEKo sks dive Sophrsxeds, BUDO Mean temperature of Nov. 1855 —..........ccsccessesscvccecsceces 43 -49 Average quantity of rain in Nov. for previous sixteen years . 4°11 inches. _ The mean temperature of the room in which the barometer is kept was 59°, ‘and the height ahove the sea-level is 100 feet, so that the observations can be reduced to 32° and sea-level if required. 19.6 | 19.1 | $6.0 f2.6€ IrZ.ov| 9.g€ |og.oflog.Lv] 706.62 363.62 $9.6z $96.62 gSo.0f =| ‘uray Ob, [rseeeseeseeeereees! og fomuar] a | $62 | of gz| tr | $f 88.62 93.67 0S,6z > 7S L.6z 06,62 ‘of 09, reetteeselessereeee] eget ega | ean 1£ | of | S.0z! ox L¢ oL.6z 79.62 €v.62 69.62 ezl.6z *6z Gr, |eeceseeesleeeeeeees| emer | emu | cm €£ | 21 ¢Szc| 64 | oF 9S.6z 9$.6z zv.6z 0g9.6z LzL.6z "97 ot.-|°%S. | to. Iemup ke om | cam tote PEELS SE] ec 4 0S LE.6z g$.6z 97.62 309.6% 379.62 “L Ir, |e] 6b, “g *s | «mu | -£€ | ¥9£ | Sof} 62 | oF £5.62 | 99.6 gt.6z of $.6z 1$9.6z "9% ZI. gO. jresteses*) ogg | og ‘ul SEE £€ z£| gz | ov 68.62 76.62 $9.62 0L6.6z gro.0£ Cz So, |eeeteterseereeeees! ema) em | egy lz | 6§ £S| +E |-98 08.62 79.62 17.62 ggl.6z 7S 8.62 “bz of. fo. |teeeeeeetl ecm) ow oM gt | 30S €S| 6+ LS gb.6z 09.62 LS.6z 936.62 gIr.of fz 1 A ve 1S | 6¢ | S.Lb] bp | SS oL.6z ¢2.6z LL.6¢ Lot.of I1z.0£ a4 OT, |teerrererieeeeerees! om | ew | og 1$ | o§ Sv| $b | 2S gl.6z 98.62 03.62 ZL1.0£ gbz.0£ S € 4 OL, |tereeee| Zo, “mw mum | cau | ¥gh | Sbb Ly| of | &S 06,62 $9.6z g$.6z 696.62 ZZ0.0£ Tey of. Lo. | Zo. “a j-msm | cm | 2b | Sb | ob gf | 1 L9.6z £L.6z 99.62 $z0,08 $Lo,0f 61) v1. £o. go. *s ‘mu | ca | Sof | She 6£) €€ | .€S 63.62 S1.0f © oL.6z zvo,0£ ogt.of “gt [ieee 20. | com | ome | SE] ib] ££) oz | oF 36.6 0g.6z - 08.62 gor.of | gS1.0f “LI ZI, |rsereseeeieceeeeeer omg | cma | co | Hb | of €€) ze | Lv 98.6z £o.0£ Lg.6z of1.0f 6%z,0£ *gI Sz. |r| zo, |emuu mum! mm | FE | Sof €f| €c | Eb Z0.0£ 34.62 oL.6z 636.62 oto.of£ “SI Lo, |rtrerteeeleeeseees| ensure | eat | cu sé} xf €€| Sc | eb £6.62 L9.6z 6S.6z 6+3.6z g00.0f “VI 80. | gt | vo, |-mu | -mu jem} rf | by | SE) of | Sb 23.6% $9.62 $5.62 964.6 £98.62 “Er reseeees) 97, leeeeseees) mum muu| au | gf | $661 S.S€) of | bb Lg.6z | £6.62 oF.6z zg9.6z | S¢L.6z 710 Of, |rseeereee! Zo, a |emua| °u gt | Zé gf| be | Sb 66.62 g9.6z Lo.6z = | gbf.6z ogt.6z ‘IL go. [ttre ro, c bane" gt | SE g£| Sz | Sb 09.6% 95.6 $z.6z E1v.62 bbS.6z "Ol So. | bz | ro. |-mu |*muu) ‘as | $9 | ob | of] rf | 1S | 62.62 0g.6z £L.6z ££g.6c | 6g0.08 | °6 Sx. fervrerre| Sx. | om | ma | ems | gh | Sh] 6E| 6z | ob | *b0.08 Z1,0£ £6.62 611.0f 6L£,0£ 8 Bo, |sreestserieereeeees! emg | om | con | ob | §S+ gf| LE | 6b z£.0£ 64.0£ £2.08 S£S.08 oLS.of “L ssteeesse|ssereteaalecceerensl concer |) come | cou | ob | Sov | S.gf| 16-| Le $S.0£ gt.0£ $1.0£ SS+.0£ gS$.of 9 pearcccccloovccccesicccccerss! eng u[eo "9 gt ov gt aA 6+ LE.0£ of.0£ 00,0£ 6S£.0€ I1rv.o£ “¢ € rettsenseleseeesenslocseeeeee! ogg | egg | emg | 85h] Sb | S.tb| of | 2S $z.0£ 91.08 08.62 361.08 11£,0£ v EO. [toresneeeioceeerces] 98. pau | msl oe Pore] Ze] of SS 11.0 $z.0f LL.6z 6£1.0£ ZIZ.0£F “€ Lo. go. jreeeeeee*| cou jue] “m | th] €£$ 1$| 6€ | gS 17.0 Lo.of 7g.6z Ezz.of got.of * seer] €o, | zo, [mss | cm | -ms | $15 | gh | €5| 2b | £S | Zrof gr.of £3.6< | Erf.of | 6SE.08 | «x Lo i?) Lo oo - 2 ousye nye od | er . eord @ *uT’ Me] ‘ul | *xe “AON e 5 : ey : 35 urd $g/*ur-e $6 a wp | ‘xepr urd ¢g ure $6 rf TH NW 9sst 3 S | ee ie Sadineies | ee - r je | Pe Tian” FP | sous ‘yormpuug ‘auyiQ Pe “PASTY “qIUOTY ae aaa -19}OWOWLIIUL, “Jaqoulore gy jo skeq ‘AUNAAG ‘asunyy younpuvg 7 “UOSNOTO *_ “Ady ay7 fg puy £NOLSOg yo Teo,A “AWW Ag SuopuarT Jvau “AOIMSIHY 20 hjzaro0g younynois0fFy ay2 fo uapivy ayz yo uosdwmoyy, ‘Ij Ag apow suownasasgg yoorbojouoazapy THE ANNALS MAGAZINE OF NATURAL HISTORY. [SECOND SERIES.] No. 110. FEBRUARY 1857. IX.—On the Organization of the Infusoria, especially the Vorti- celle. By Dr, C. F. J. Lacumann*, [With a Plate.] In the summer of 1852, when I had the pleasure of working in the laboratory of Professor J. Miiller, he called my attention and that of another of his pupils, M. A. Schneider, to Stein’s memoirs upon the Infusoriat. ~ These memoirs, in conjunction with the older and contempora- neous ones of Focket and Cohn §, appeared to commence a new sera in the theory of the Infusoria; by their means we first ob- tained information regarding their propagation, of which, up to that time, we knew nothing, except fissation and gemmation. Important and interesting as were the facts discovered by the three observers above mentioned, they still only formed the im- erfect commencement of a history of the development of the nfusoria, to the further advancement of which many must con- tribute. Stein’s observations appeared to be far from sufficient to show his supposition of the connexion between the Vorticelle and Acinete as anything more than a rather vague hypothesis. For this reason we endeavoured to test their correctness by our own observations, and if possible either to fill up the deficiencies in Stein’s series of observations, or to prove his supposition to be false. _)* Translated from Miiller’s Archiv, 1856, p, 340, by W. S. Dallas, F.L.S. _. ~ Untersuchungen iiber die Entwickelung der Infusorien ; Wiegmann’s Archiv, 1840, p. 91. Neue Beitrage zur Kenntniss der Entwickelungs- eschichte und des feineren Baues der Infusorien; Siebold und Kdlliker’s eitschrift, iii. p. 475. (Translated, Annals, new series, vol. ix. p. 471.) Rnitieher Bericht der Naturforscherversammlung zu Bremen, 1844, p- 110. § Siebold und KoOlliker’s Zeitschrift, iii. p. 277. Ann. & Mag. N. Hist. Ser. 2. Vol. xix. 8 114 Dr. C. F. J. Lachmann on the Organization of Infusoria. We soon succeeded in getting Stein’s Acineta of the Duck- weed*, which he regards as the resting-form of Vorticella nebu- lifera. A. Schneider first found a specimen with an embryo already rotating, the escape of which we then expected with im- patience ; but this, like all the other specimens whose birth we observed during the summer, escaped from our sight before be- coming attached and converted into an Acineta or a Vorticella. Once, however, Professor Miiller, whilst searching for an Acineta-bud which had escaped from him, found an animal which was exactly like it, swam very slowly, and at last, becoming perfectly stationary, gave forth rays and grew into an Acineta. This observation of course increased our doubts as to the correctness of Stein’s view. It is true we were not certain whether the animal which became an