ON SOME GENERIC NAMES FIRST MENTIONED IN THE''CONCHOLOGICAL ILLUSTRATIONS."By William Healey Dall,Curator, Division of Mollushs, United States National Museum..In reviewing the Fissurellidae of the Pacific coast of North AmericaI found some confusion existing in the synonymy of several well-known species and genera, the clearing up of which may have someinterest for students.The following data will serve toward that end
:
Genus LUCAPINA (Gray) Sowerby, 183S.Lucapina (elegans) Gray, in Sowerby, Conch. 111., FissureUa, p. 4, No. 38, fig. 29,June, 1835; as synonym of F. canceUata Sowerby, Conch. 111., p. 4 (asof Solander MS.)Lucapina Philippi, Test. Utr. Sicil., vol. 2, 1844, p. 90, cites canceUata Sowerby, astype and sole species mentioned.Lucapina (Gray) Herrmannsen, Index Gen. Mai., vol. 1, p. 627, 1846; cites Fis-sureUa canceUata as type.Lucapina Gray, Syn. (^ont. Brit. Mus., ed. 42, p. 147; nude name under Fissurellidae,no species cited; ed. 44, 1840, p. 114 (ed. 44 A., 1840, p. 117), one line of diagnosis,no species cited.Lucapina Gray, Proc. Zool. Soc, 1847, p. 147, No. 160, cites FissureUa aperta Sowerby,and L. elegans Gray.Lucapina (Gray) Herrmannsen, Index Gen. Mai., Suppl., p. 76, 1852, cites FissureUaaperta Sowerby, following Gray in Proc. Zoul. Soc, 1847.Lucapina Gray, in M. E. Gray, Fig. Moll. An., vol. 4, p. 92, 1850, cites L. canceUataand L. crenulata, nude names, as examples.Foraminella (Guilding MS.) Sowerby, Conch. 111., p. 4, No. 38, June, 1835, as Forami-nella sowerbii Guilding, MS.; St. Vincent, West Indies. This name precedesLucapina in the text, and is cited as a synonym of FissureUa canceUata Sowerby,Conch. 111., p. 4,Foraminella Guilding, Cat. Conch. Nom., 1845, according to Agassiz in Scudder,Nomencl. Zoologicus, p. 139, 18*82.?Catlow, Conch. Nomencl., p. 102, No. 11,1845; cites from Sowerby, Conch. 111., 1835. Not Foraminella Leven. Brach. 1902.)Lucapina H. and A. Adams, Gen. Rec. Moll., vol. 1, p. 447, 1854; examples figuredL. reticulata Donovan and L. crenulata Sowerby; vol. 2, p. 630, 1858, notes segrega-tion of subgenus Glyphis Carpenter, and cites G. inaequalis as sole example, alsoCapiluna Gray, as synonym.Lucapina Woodward, Manual, p. 150, 1852, F. elegans Gray, sole example cited; butit is confused with F. crenulata Sowerby, from which the diagnosis is drawn.Glyphis Carpenter, Mazatlan Cat., p. 220, 1856; first species FissureUa inaequalisSowerby. (Not Glyphis Agassiz, 1853.)Proceedings U. S. National Museum, Vol. 48?No. 2079. 437
438 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol.48.Capiluna Gray, Guide Moll. Brit. Mus., p. 166, 1857. C. cuvieri, sole example.Lucapina Gray, Guide Moll. Brit. Mus., p. 166, 1857. L. cancellata and L. crenulatacited.Lucapina Tryon, Struct, and Syst. Conch., vol. 2, p. 326, 1883, L. crenulata cited asexample.
?
Fischer, Man. de Conchy]., p. 858, 1885, same type; as subgenus of Fis-surelUdea Orbigny, 1839.Chlamydoglyphis Pilsbry, Man., pp. 198, 200, 1890. Type, Lucapina adspersa Philippi,\2>'^b= cancellata Sowerby, 1835.The name Lucapina (Gray, MS.) was first put in print by Sowerby,in his monograph of Fissurella in the Conchological Illustrations. Inthis work he had the cooperation of Doctor Gray and so states, sothat the authenticity of the reference is certain. The citation of themanuscript name of Gray is preceded in the same paragraph byanother, Foraminella of Guilding, founded on the same type. As thefirst reviser, PhiUppi, accepted Lucapina and not Foraminella, theformer will take precedence. In the "Synopsis of the Contents ofthe British Museum," 1840, Gray gives as a diagnosis of this genus" in Lucapina the mantle covers the cancellated shell." It is evidentthat when Gray proposed tlie genus he conceived of it as a Fissurellain which the mantle covered all or a part of the outside of the shelland the anal foramen was rounded or oval. When Carpenter sepa-rated the genus Gh/phis he included in it those species previouslyplaced by Gray and the brothers Adams in Lucapina, which had therounded foramen, but in which the mantle did not exceed the marginof the aperture as required by Gray's diagnosis. It is obvious that,according to the rules, no species can be selected as type which wasnot mentioned in the original publication. This restricts our searchfor a type to Fissurella elegans Gray, or its equivalent, F. cancellataSowerby. The latter name being the only species mentioned, be-comes the monotype. This view was accepted by Pliilippi, 1844,Herrmannsen, 1846, and many others. It now remains to discoverwhat is the proper specific name to be retained for tliis species.There was an earUer Fissurella cancellata Gray, of 1825, so the specificname of Sowerby can not be retained. The specific name of sowerhiiGuilding precedes in the text that proposed by Gray and must beadopted. It now remains to identify the species, which from Sow-erby's excellent figure is not difficult. It is the West Indian shellcommonly known as adspersa Philippi, 1845, aegis Reeve, 1850, andprobably leniiginosa Reeve, 1850. Specimens in the Smithsonian col-lection, received from the 1839 collections of Dr. L. Pfeiffer in Cuba,through Thomas Bland, were labeled "fasciata Pfr." and the writerused that name in several papers ; but a search for the place of pub-lication proving fruitless, it seems probable that the name was inedited.Pilsbry noted the resemblance of Sowerby's figure to adspersa, but wasapparently misled by the fact that Reeve in the Iconica, 1849, figuredunder the name of cancellata, another species which he afterward
NO. 2079. GENERA IN CONCHOLOGICAL ILLUSTRATIONS?DALL. 439called Jiondurasensis and sufusa; and the younger Sowerby in theThesaurus confused together these two and the analogous species {F.inaequalis Sowerby ?) of the Pacific coast.The species aperta Sowerby { = Tiiantula Lamarck) in the Con-chological Illustrations is the type of Pupillaea Gray/ and could not,therefore, be utihzed as a type for Lucapina in spite of Gray'sassociatmg them m 1847. The same is true of Fissurella crenulataSowerby, which he placed with cancellata in 1857. Yet, owing toCarpenter's action in segregating Glypliis without determming thematter of priority, it has come about that later authors, includingthe usually accurate S. P. Woodward, have regarded Fissurellacrenulata Sowerby, 1825, as the type of Lucapina, though it was notmentioned in that connection until years after the first pubhcationof the name. The confusion with the name cancellata Gray (notSowerby), which is the same as Patella graeca Pennant and Mon-tagu (not Linnaeus), as apertura Montagu (not Born), as reticulataDonovan (not of Bolten), and is not cancellata Gmelin, is respon-sible for Donovan's name getting mto the synonymy.This state of affairs leaves the large and beautiful Fissurella cren-ulata of Sowerby, so well known on the Pacific coast, witliout avalid generic name. For this I propose the name Macrochasma inallusion to the large anal foramen.Another monotyj^ic generic name appears in the ConchologicalIllustrations, Macroschisma Gray, founded on Patella macroscMsmaSolander, from Japan, and another species from Austraha. Thelatter is not named and was regarded by Sowerby as a variety ofthe Japanese shell.From the examination of a large number of specimens from theUniversity of Tokio it seems probable that individual variation inthis species is great enough to cov'er several of the species whichhave been described from Japan.MachrocJiisma Swainson ^ is founded on the Fissurella macro-schisma of Sowerby's Genera of Shells (fig. 5), which the latterauthor supposed to be identical with F. Mantula Lamarck; Sowerby'sshell hardly differs from the typical Macroschisma, with which itprobably should be united.Pupillaea Gray also appears for the first time in the ConchologicalIllustrations, cited from the unpublished notes of Doctor Gray onthe Mollusca of Beechey's Voyage. It is founded on Fissurellaaperta Sowerby, 1825, which, like the earlier name Mantula Lamarck,1822, was based on Born's vignette figure F, on page 414 of theMuseum Vmdobonense. AH the shells of the various species ofthis group are remarkably similar m shape, color pattern, and sculp-ture. Until the animals have been carefully compared no final
? Conch. 111. Fissurella, p. 2, No. 12, 1834. 2 Mai., p. 356, 1840.
440 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol.48.decision can be had as to their relations and the number of vahdgroups. Since Sowerby's shell is stated to have come from SouthAfrica, there can be little doubt that the identification of Krauss iscorrect. It is in the highest degree improbable that Meuschen in1782 had any opportunity of knowing the very rare Magellanicspecies called megairema by Orbigny; but South African shellswere then abundant in Europe, owing to the trade with the Indiesby way of the Cape of Good Hope.Doctor Pilsbry in the ^Manual places Jiiantula { = megatrema)under FissurelUdea; aperta Sowerby, under Pupillaea; scutellumCNIeuschen) Gmelm, under Megatebennus subgenus Aniblycldlepas;with reasonable justification, but the bare shells, especially if alittle worn, can hardly be told apart.The last genus of the group referred to is Cemoria, cited fromLeach's proof sheets, but luckily anticipated by Lowe's Puncturella,based on F. noachina of Linnaeus.