I had hoped to have found the 19 a misprint, but the MS. and the printed copy agree precisely in every particular.
C. flavum. Buc. subovatum sulcatum, latere altero scabrum, altero dentatum.
The redundant "subovata" was not in the copy, where the remark was made that the species resembled the shell subsequently termed Chama cor, the figure of which (Gualt. t. 71. f. E.) had been cited, but erased in the MS. The ideal hence derived is a very different shell from the one supposed identical. No mention is made of lateral teeth: was it then a veritable Cardium?
C. lævigatum. Buc. ovatum, striis læviusculis longitudinalibus.
I do not consider this (the B. striatum of the MS.) to be identical with the C. lævigatum of the 'Systema.'
C. serratum. Buc. ovale læve, antice serratum.
"Ovata" stood in the place of the printed "obovata": "curvatus" and "parvi" were subsequent to the MS.
C. triste. Buc. ovatum læve, rima anoque obsolete striatis.
The 'Museum' was referred to for this shell previously to the publication of the details. Curious to relate, the species was wholly omitted in the twelfth edition of the 'Systema.' It was, in all probability, a Mactra, which genus had not been constituted at the period when the description of C. triste was issued.
C. pectinatum. Buc. subcordatum, striis hinc longitudinalibus, illine transversalibus.