Kaas: On some preoccupied names 83

Notes on Loricata

by

P. Kaas (The Hague)

5. On some preoccupied names

In preparing a catalogue of recent Loricata I came across a few

preoccupied names which are still in use.

a) Lepidopleurus carinatus Dall (1927, p. 11) was preoccupied

by an of the same name described by W. E. LEACH (1852, [= cinerea So DALL’s p. 228) Lepidochitona (Linné)]. species, need of which is a rather than a Lepidopleurus, is in a new of learned for it name. In honour the author I propose Hanleya dalli

nom. nov.

Chiton Poli 1—20) b) cinereus (1791, p. 4, pl. 3 figs. was ac-

cepted by PILSBRY (1893, p. 283, pl. 54 figs. 28—33) for the Medi- of believed be terranean species Middendorffia. POLI wrongly it to

the cinereus of LINNÉ (1767, p. 1107) now generally admitted

to be the species called Chiton marginatus by PENNANT (1777, p. 71, pl. 36 fig. 2) and subsequent authors [= Lepidochitona cinerea (Linné)].

held it retain PILSBRY the opinion that was possible to a preoc-

cupied name when the species proved to belong to a different , but such is no more in accordance with the International Rules of

Zoological Nomenclature. Therefore POLI'S Chiton cinereus must be

dropped.

described Chiton = caprea-SCACCHI (1836, p. 9) a caprearm (sic!

rum), but his short diagnosis is not at all satisfying. Yet MONTERO- claimed collection SATO, who to have seen a type specimen in the of it identical with which PETIT, considers to be Chiton polii was before described shortly by PHILIPPI (1836, p. 106). As the latter species is undoubtedly identical with Chiton cinereus Poli, PHILIPPI'S be called Midden- name is quite acceptable. Hence the species has to The Chiton of 132), dorffia polii (Philippi). polii DESHAYES (1837, p.

preoccupied by PHILIPPI, is a mere synonym of Rhyssoplax olivaceus (Spengler).

As MONTEROSATO did not redescribe SCACCHI'S Ch. caprearum there

is no evidence that his identification was right. RiSSO described Chiton but his dia- (1826, p. 267) a crenulatus,

gnosis consisting of no more than five words is worthless and not at

No. vol. ') 4, see: Basteria, 20, p. 106 (1956). 84 BASTERIA, Vol. 21, No. 4 en 5, 1957

should be all justifies LOCARD'S supposition (1892, p. 233) that it identical with the present species.

REEVE described (1848, pi. 28 sp. & fig. 185) a Chiton corrugatus fromCh.unknown locality. The description and figure fit the cine- of after studied in the British reus POLI. CARPENTER having the type of Museum declared it to be the young this species (fide PILSBRY, Therefore be 1893, p. 284). REEVE'S name must regarded as a synonym of M. polii (Philippi). Chiton crenulatus c) Broderip (1832, p. 27) was preoccupied by

Chiton crenulatus Risso (1826, p. 267) [=? Middendorffia polii renamed (Philippi)]. The species was by CARPENTIER (1857, p. 193) «1 Tonicia” and be called Tonicia as ? forbesii accordingly must for- besi Carpenter. Chiton 203, d) elegans Frembly (1827, p. suppl. pi. 17 fig. 6), also of Chiton of a species Tonicia, was preoccupied by elegans

BLAINVILLE (1825, p. 540). SOWERBY described and figured (1840, figs. 73, 74) the juvenile of FREMBLY' Chiton This has s species as sparsus. specific name now valid The has be called Tonicia to be accepted as the one. species to sparsa (Sowerby). Chiton lineolatus e) Frembly (1827, p. 204, suppl. pi. 17 fig. 7), of Tonicia animal of a species again, was preoccupied by an the same described name by BLAINVILLE (1825, p. 541) [= Ischnochiton lineolatus (Blainville)]. described POTIEZ & MICHAUD (1838, p. 534) a Chiton bruguieri be of The which may possibly the same species as that FREMBLY. type(s) of the latter formed part of the collections of the "Musee de of de Douai", which, as Dr. J. M. GAILLARD the Laboratoire Malaco- logie in Paris kindly informs me, have totally disappeared. This makes it impossible to decide whether Chiton bruguieri and Chiton lineo- latus Frembly are identical or not. valid available for Ch. As there is no name lineolatus Frembly I propose Tonicia fremblyana nom. nov. for it. Chiton reticulatus f) Nierstrasz (1905, p. 81, pi. 2 fig. 36, pi. 7 Chiton reticulatus Reeve figs. 195—199) was preoccupied by (1847, pi. 15 sp. & fig. 83).

LELOUP I examined (1933, p. 16, pi. figs. 5—8) a specimen from

Pulu Pisang which is quite referable to NLERSTRASZ's species. How- ever, LELOUP took Ch. reticulatus Nierstrasz for the same as the

Chiton vauclusensis of HEDLEY & HULL (1909, p. 261, pi. 74 figs. of 19—23) from the East coast Australia, S. of Point Cartwright,

Queensland. LELOUP had only the specimen from Pulu Pisang before him and did it with NIERSTRASZ'S with not compare types, nor Kaas: On some preoccupied names 85

specimens of Ch. vauclusensis from the type locality. Yet from and LELOUP'S descriptive notes figures alone it is already obvious that his specimen from Pulu Pisang is not identical with Ch. vauclu- sensis Hedley & Hull.

According to IREDALE & HULL (1926, p. 177, pi. 19 figs. 8—12, pi. 20 figs 7, 12) the ribs on the lateral areas and end valves of "not nodulose." Ch. vauclusensis are distinctly "The central areas

ribbed longitudinally strongly throughout, the jugal area very narrow and linear."

Writing about the head valve of Ch. reticulatus NIERSTRASZ states: "die Rippen bestehen aus hintereinander liegenden Hocker- chen." And about the median valves: "Die pleuralen und jugalen Felder sind nicht von einander getrennt. sind starken Die Mittelfelder mit Langsrippen versehen, welche aus flachen, unregelmaszigen, zusammenhangenden Hockerchen beste- hen ..."

In Ch. vauclusensis the ribs on the pleural areas are smooth. Mo- reover the girdle scales in Ch. reticulatus are strongly ribbed with Ch. vauclusensis striate" 9—10 ribs; in they are only "obsoletely

(IREDALE & HULL).

These and other minor differences as wel as the fact that the localities of Ch. vauclusensis and Ch. reticulatus Nierstrasz are rather widely separated, tell strongly in favour of the specific separability of the two forms. This leaves the species of NIERSTRASZ without a valid nierstrasziana for name; consequently I propose Rhyssoplax it.

Chiton scaber of g) Reeve (1847, pi. 17 sp. & fig. 106), a species Chiton scaber of BLAINVILLE Nuttallina, was preoccupied by (1825, p. 553), an Acanthochitona.

REEVE'S species was called Acanthopleura fluxa by CARPENTER be called Nuttallina (1864, p. 649); consequently it has to fluxa (Carpenter).

REFERENCES

BLAINVILLE, H. M. D. DE, 1825. Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles,

vol. 36.

BRODERIP, W. J., 1832. (Descriptions of which formed part of collections made of the by Mr. H. CUMING on the western coast

South America.) Proc. Zool. Soc. London, pt. 2, pp. 25 —28. 86 BASTERIA, Vol. 21, No. 4 en 5, 1957

CARPENTER, P. P., 1857. Catalogue of the Mazatlan shells. (Privately

printed)

1864. on the state of our know- —, Supplementary report present of of ledge with regard to the Mollusca the West coast North

America. Rep. Brit. Ass. Adv. Sci. for 1863, pp. 517—686.

of Mol- Dall, W. H., 1927. Diagnosis undescribed new species of

lusks in the collection of the United States National Museum. Proc.

U.S. Nat. Mus., vol. 70, art. 19, pp. 1—11.

DESHAYES, G. P., 1837. Expedition scientifique de Moree, III, part. 1,

sect. 1: Animaux Vertebres, Mollusques et Polypiers. (Paris)

FREMBLY, J., 1827. A description of several new species of found of on the coast Chili in 1825. Zool. Journ. vol. 3. Suppl.

plates, 4th part, pi. 16, 17 (issued July 1830-—-Sept. 1831).

A. of and HEDLEY, C., & HULL, F. B., 1909. Descriptions new notes

on other Australian Polyplacophora. Rec. Austr. Mus., vol. 7, pp. 260—266, pis. 73, 74.

(IREDALE, T., & HULL, A. F. B., 1926. Monograph of the Australian

Loricates, Phylum Mollusca — Order Loricata, no. VI. Austr. Zool.,

vol. 4, pt. 3, pp. 164—185, pis. 18—20.

LEACH, W. E., 1852. Molluscorum Britanniae Synopsis. (London)

Resultats du Indes Orien- LELOUP, E., 1933. scientifiques voyage aux

tales Neerlandaises de L.L. A.A. R.R. le Prince et la Princesse

Leopold de Belgique, vol. 2 fasc. 13, Brachiopodes et Amphineures.

Mem. Mus. roy. Hist. Nat. Belg., vol. 2, fasc. 13 (hors serie).

LINNE, C., 1767. Systema Naturae, editio duodecima reformata, torn. I,

pars. II, Classis VI, Vermes. (Holmiae),

LOCARD, A., 1892. Les coquilles marines des cotes de France. (Paris).

T. Enumerazione Sinonimia delle MONTEROSATO, A. DI, 1878. e Con-

chiglie mediterranee.Giorn. di Sci. Nat. e Econ., vol. 13. (Palermo)

NIERSTRASZ, H. F., 1905. Die Chitonen der Siboga-Expedition. Mo-

nogr. nr. 48, Siboga Exp. (Leiden) Kaas: On some preoccupied names 87

PENNANT, T., 1777. British Zoology of Crustacea, Mollusca, Testacea, vol. 4. (London)

Enumeratio Molluscorum Siciliae viven- PHILIPPI, R. A., 1836. cum

tium turn in tellure tertiaria fossilium quae in itinere suo obser- vavit, vol. I. (Berolini)

PILSBRY, H. A., 1892—93. Polyplacophora. TRYON'S Manual of Con-

chology, vol. 14. (Philadelphia)

POLI, J. X., 1791. Testacea Utriusque Siciliae, vol. I, Multivalvia (Parmae)

POTIEZ, V. L. V., & MLCHAUD, A. L. G., 1838. Galerie des Mollusques des ou Catalogue methodique, descriptif et raisonne Mollusques et

Coquilles du Musee de Douai, vol. I. (Paris)

REEVE, L., 1847—48. Conchologia Iconica or Illustrations of the

shells of molluscous , vol. IV. Monogr. Chiton. (London)

RLSSO, A., 1826. Histoire Naturelle des principales productions de

l'Europe Meridionale et particulierement de celles des environs de

Nice et des Alpes Maritimes, vol. IV. (Paris)

SCACCHI, A., 1836. Catalogus Conchyliorum Regni Neapolitani. (Na-

poli)

SOWERBY, G. B., 1840. The Conchological Illustrations. Genus Chiton. (London)