SOLD ALSO

Br HODGES, FIGGIS, & CO. (LTD.), GRAFTON-ST.;

BY WILLIAMS & NORGATE,

LONDON: 14, HENRIETTA-STREET, COVENT GARDEN.

EDINBURGH: 20, SOUTH FREDERICK-ST.

OXFORD: 7, BROAD-ST.

A REPORT UPON THE MOLLUSCA (EXCLUDING THE CEPHALOPODA AND NUDIBRANCHIATA) OBTAINED BY THE ROYAL IRISH ACADEMY CRUISES OF 1885, 1886, AND 1888. BY GEORGE W. CHASTER.

[Read JUNE 27, 1898.]

A PRELIMINARY and confessedly incomplete list of the Mollusca from the "Lord Bandon " expedition of 1885 was drawn up by Mr. W. Swanston, F.G.S., and published in the Proceedings of the R.I.A. in the following year. Further notes on mollusca of special interest, obtained by the later expeditions, have appeared subsequently. But no attempt has been made to draw up a full and annotated list of the Testacea of the district investigated by the Academy-a district surpassingly rich in its molluscan fauna. My object in preparing the present report is to attempt to supply this want, so far as is possible.

Some time ago there came into my hands certain of the dredgings which had been partially examined by Mr. Swanston, and put aside to be more carefully searched. These gatherings yielded a large number of species, many not included in the published list, and some of remarkable interest. On my communicating the results to Dr. Scharff, he, with the greatest courtesy, consented to allow me to examine the material that had been deposited in the Dublin Museum, R.I.A. PROC., SER. III., VOL. V.

B

only stipulating, as was necessary in the interests of the institution under his care, that any types required by the Museum should be sent. Mr. Joseph Wright, F.G.S., also, with the genial readiness which ever characterizes the true naturalist, has permitted me to search through the floatings from the finer portions of the dredgings, from which floatings he had obtained the Foraminifera already reported upon. To these gentlemen I must express my gratitude. My tribute of thanks is also due to Professor Haddon, Messrs. R. Welch, R. Ll. Praeger, B.A., and A. R. Nichols, B.A., for their hearty co-operation; and to Mr. E. A. Smith, r.z.s., and the Marquis of Monterosato, for their kindness in determining certain critical forms.

The material, as it came to me, consisted of floatings, shelly debris, muddy sand, and fine gravel, from all of which the coarser part had already been separated. There were also a few boxes containing such of the larger shells as had been discarded. In the great majority of cases the larger forms, those measuring more than a quarter of an inch in length, are represented only by immature or fragmentary examples. Respecting these I can, therefore, give little or no information beyond the mere fact of their occurrence. Far different is the case of the more minute species. These are in many instances represented by a very great number of specimens, sometimes showing marked varietal modifications. Amongst them, too, there are several possessing special interest, being either rare or hitherto unknown.

I may here mention that, during the process of examination, certain species occurred in so large a number of the dredgings (not always in great numbers, be it understood) as to impart a characteristic "facies" to the molluscan fauna. I refer, of course, to such forms as are usually accounted more or less rare. Of these character

istic species the following may be mentioned :—Pulsellum lofotense, Sars; Liostomia clavula, Lov.; Mangelia brachystoma, Phil.; Neolepton Clarkia, Cl.; Alvania abyssicola, Forb.; Cardium minimum, Phil. Scarcely less remarkable is the comparative rarity of Cyclostrema, Jeffreysia, Velutina, Turbonilla. Rissoa (Cingula) obtusa, Cantr., usually one of the commonest of molluscs in British seas, only occurs in one or two gatherings with even a moderate degree of frequency. The group Bela is quite unrepresented.

In some cases an attempt has been made to indicate the bathymetrical range of a species. The figures given refer only to the coasts of Kerry and Cork. It seems far better thus to indicate the range of the various species within the limits of the district under consideration, rather than to give the vertical range of a widely distributed

species, perhaps sub-littoral in Arctic regions and abyssal in the Mediterranean. In compiling these figures I have availed myself of the information given in published accounts such as the "Porcupine" expedition reports, for the first seven stations of the 1869 expedition lie within the limits of the area under consideration. As regards classification and arrangement, I have pretty closely followed the scheme adopted in the Rev. Canon Norman's "Museum Normannianum." The deplorably incorrect nomenclature of Jeffreys'"British Conchology" makes the matter of terminology a difficult one for a student who, like myself, has but little leisure time, and but limited opportunities for consulting the necessary literature. My endeavour will be to employ the names which, by the rule of priority, must of necessity be adopted. Unfortunately the number of changes is large, but there seems to be no alternative course.

As regards the value of sub-generic divisions, opinions may be allowed to differ. It seems greatly to facilitate the close study of some of the large groups, such as the Odostomia and Rissoæ, if the species be arranged in small groups with distinctive generic names, rather than to "lump" together a great assemblage of more or less heterogeneous forms.

I feel compelled to enter a strong protest against the useless and ridiculous practice of "emending" the names which have been given to species and genera-a practice greatly in vogue at the present time. Can anyone pretend that the change of Kellia into Kellyia aids in any way the study of the mollusc? Quite the contrary, it is a hindrance, increasing as it does the burden of synonymy, already weighing so heavily upon the student. Moreover, an author is not responsible for any want of classical erudition displayed in the names he quotes: to each name is (or should be) appended the name of its originator, to whom alone belongs any blame. Any attempt to tinker with original names seems to me to savour strongly of pedantry and impertinence; for the original author may have possessed scholastic knowledge equal to that of his critic. Are Skeneia, Rissoia, Montaguia really improvements upon Skenea, Rissoa, Montacuta? Let us take Rissoia: even if conchologists agree upon this, will the student of the sponges be willing to similarly change the name Nardoa, the only precisely analogous case I know? From Mr. MacAndrews' name there have been used in the mollusca Macandreæ, Macandrai, Macandrewi, Macandrevia. Can conchologists agree which of these is right, and will the student of the Madreporaria accept their decision for the correction of the name of the little Irish coral Sphenotrochus Macandrewanus? These