Heteropods, Eliminate Some of Difficulties, Which the of This of Animals Is Investigator Group Sure to Encounter
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MONOGRAPH OF THE ATLANTIDAE. 1 NOTE I. Systematic Monograph of the Atlantidae (Heteropoda) with enumeration of the species in the Leyden Museum BY Dr. J.J. Tesch (With plates 1—5). Having recently 1) tried to bring some order into the in great confusion, existing the systematic literature on the and to the Heteropods, eliminate some of difficulties, which the of this of animals is investigator group sure to encounter I with, have been convinced, more than anybody else, that could have but my study nothing a provisional value, and that firmer a base could only be obtained by means of continued labour, and comparison of more material. I For a systematic revision have chosen the family Atlantidae. These animals with their tiny, inconspicuous shells, have received but little attention, and after Souleyet’s memorable than half work, more a century ago, only very few naturalists have dealt with the group. Among them I may name Gould, Smith, Oberwimmer, Vayssière and Yet it be myself. may safely said, that the discrimination of the is more difficult than in species perhaps any other family of the Heteropods. Mr. P. J. to the Buitendijk presented, shortly ago, Museum, a collection of plankton, brought together, almost 1) J. J. Tesch. Die Iletciopodcn der Siboga-Expcdition, Siboga-Eipcditie. Monogr. LI. 1006. Notes from the Loyden Museum, "Vol. XXX. 1 2 MONOGRAPH OF TI1E ATLANTIDAE. exclusively, in the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. The of this material has been most laborious study a task, as I had to search for the small Atlantidae among innumerable of quantities Copepods, Ostracods, Oumacea, etc., with which each of the glass vessels was crowded. The collection, from the surface of the originating Ocean, is rich in young forms and in not full-grown specimens, which seems to to the poiut the fact, quite as in Pteropoda, that the adult specimens of the Atlantidae, and probably of all the Heteropoda, are comparatively rarely found at the surface, and generally prefer deeper zones. I should not have been able to bring my study to a rather satisfactory end, if Prof. L. Joubiu had not most kindly sent to on me, my request, the valuable types of which Soulevet, are deposited in the »Museum d'Histoire naturelle' at Paris. I beg this to take gentleman my sincere thanks for the service he has great rendered me. Taking into account its long preservation, for seventy in years, alcohol, the collection proved to be in an excellent state. Unfortunately, two of Souleyet's species, Atlanta and Atlanta quoyana involuta, were not represented, while third a Atlanta had ( depressa) its shell quite dissolved. So, there remains some in uncertainty, my opinion at least, about the two firstnamed forms (which are neither in the British Museum); on the other hand, I have been fortunate to enough recognize Atlanta depressa in the collection of Mr. Buitendijk. I have it useful thought to figure all the species of Souleyet again '), with of exception those, of which good drawings, leaving no doubt as to the identification of the species, already exist. Souleyet's figures, though generally remarkably accurate, are, however, too small, and he has overlooked several remarkable features about sculpture, which excellent may supply specific characters. When else is ]) nothing noticed, the here figures given are drawn after with Souleyet's types, the camcrn. Notes from tlie Leyden Museum, Vol. XXX. MONOGRAPH OF TIIE ATLANTIDAE. 3 this contribute May paper something to our knowledge of the aud facilitate in the task of future group, any way investigators — a task which I know by experience to be by no means an easy one. The genera of the Atlantidae. Two genera are generally admitted, Oxygyrus and Atlanta, which are distinguished by a whole series of characters. After the study of Souleyet's types I have thought it to add a third Protatlanta the of necessary genus, , type which is represented by Souleyet's Atlanta lamanoni, which name has been altered by Smith, for reasons of priority in in Atlanta This nomenclature, souleyeti. remarkable new forms genus in many respects a transition between Atlanta and but it cannot be classed either of Oxygyrus, among these genera. to Key the genera. 1. Shell nautiloid, all whorls in the same plain, horny to lesser to keel a greater or extent, according age; mem- branous, nearly as broad as the last whorl; operculum animal with triangular; a very bulky proboscis and a large sucker on the fin Oxygyrus Benson. Shell right-handed; apical whorls forming a little spire side the Hat umbilicus at one of shell, an existing at the op- posite operculum oval, with a spiral 2 side; rounded, portion .. 2. Keel of the shell cartilaginous, encircling nearly the is whole last whorl (but often wanting as it most easily to be removed) and extending to the outer lip of the shell 1 aperture; quite ) cartilaginous (?); animal very much resembling that of Oxygyrus with a mighty , proboscis and a large sucker Protatlanta mihi. of which well show 1) The specimens Souleyct, are very preserved, no trace of chalky matter in their shells. On the other hand, Smith (p. 44) has Atlanta. This stated, that the shell is „of the same vitreous character" as in therefore remain unsettled. question may .Notes from the Leyden Museum, "Vol. XXX. 4 MONOGRAPH OK THE ATLANTIDAE. Keel of the shell chalky, as is indeed the whole shell, outer lip of the aperture always more or less fissured; animal with a slender proboscis and a smaller sucker on the fin Atlanta Lesueur. Oxygyrus Benson¹). Atlanta (p.p.) auctorum. 1835. Oxygyrus Benson. 1836. Helicophlegma {p.p.) d'Orbigny. 1841. Ladas Cantraine. The well-known of this typical represeutant genus, O. keraudreni has been classed the (Lesueur), firstly among species of Atlanta (so by Lesueur himself, Rang, Cuvier, till Benson established it. Deshayes), a new genus for The diagnosis, given by this author of the type, his O. in flatus, has never been is which, moreover, figured, very incomplete and does not show any specific characters, although beyond doubt to be applied to Oxygyrus, and probably to It the common O. keraudreni. seems advisable to reject Benson's species. I have shown in my monograph (pp. 49 and 50), that Macdonald is the of Oxygyrus n. sp. young stage a species aside of Souleyet. Leaving some doubtful forms (which I shall have occasion to refer to further on), there remain only two species. Key to the species. Shell for the cartilaginous greater part (in adult state), large (5 — 10 mm.), chalky part of shell without spiral lines; median plate of radula with three spines, of which the middle is the largest one, while the lateral spines are nearly obliterated . Oxygyrus keraudreni (Lesueur). Shell with its cartilaginous part (if present) smaller, small As to the literature I be allowed to to 1) may refer my former monograph E. and especially to A. Smith, Challenger-Expedition LXXII, 1888. Notes from tlie Leyden Museum, Vol. XXX. MONOGRAPH OF THE ATLANTIDAE. 5 (0,5 —3 nun.), chalky part, either wholly or on the penul- timate whorl, provided with conspicuous undulating spiral lines; median plate of radula with three spines, all of the same nearly length . Oxygyrus rangi (Souleyet). Species 1. Oxygyrus keraudreni (Lesueur). 1817. Atlanta keraudreni Lesueur. 1835. Oxygyrus inflatus? Benson. 183G. Atlanta (Helicophlegma) keraudreni d'Orbiguy. 1840. bivonae Pirajuo. „ 1841. Ladas keraudreni Cantraine. 1850. Oxygyrus keraudreni Gray. 1852. Atlanta, violacea? Gould. 1852. tessellata? Gould. ,, 1852. mediterranea? ,, Costa, non Quoy et Gaimard (1832), Souleyet (1852) '), Ray Lankester (1883) and Pelseneer (1906). Animals: Mediterranean, date? ± 20 sp., Cantraine. Atlantic N., 23" 1 Ocean, (0° W.), 1879, sp., Kruisinga. u (1° S., 23" W.), 1879, 4 sp., // Species 2. Oxygyrus rangi (Souleyet). 1852. Atlanta rangi Souleyet. 1862. Macdouald. Oxygyrus n. sp. 1888. Oxygyrus rangi Smith. Animals : 3 Mediterranean, date? sp., Buitendijk. Indian Ocean 2 ), January '06, 1 sp., u il 5 April '06, sp., u 1) Souleyet (Voy. Bonite) and after him Kay bankester (ISnc. brit.) and I'elseneer of 1 refer of A. (Treatise Zoology, p Gl) erroneously a figure peroni to O. keraudreni. It be stated that with the Ocean" in this 2) may here, term ..Indian paper always the same route: Pcrim—Point de Gallc—Sabang is meant. Notes from the I.eyden Museum, "Vol. XXX. 6 MONOGIUIMI 01'- TIIE ATI.ANTIDAE. I confess, that I entertain some doubt as to the specific distinctness of these two species. The features by which to most they are be recognized, seem to be conspicuous, but they all (except those of the radula) vanish with in- creasing age. As I have out in pointed formerly my monograph (p. 50), and is f. i. stated O. keraudreni in by Oberwimmer, passes its youth through a Bellerophina-stage, as it is called, and it seems as if O. rangi is only an intermediate form be- tween this Bellerophina and the full-grown O. keraudreni. The of Mr. all specimens Buitendijk were young specimens in different stages of development and from them I inferred the following notes: of I. Shell '/ mm.: Quite with 2 chalky, wholly provided undulating spiral lines. Form much rounded, which becomes total yet more conspicuous by the absence of a keel. tinted Faintly in rose. (Bellerophina). 1 11. Shell of mm.: At the aperture a small amount of cartilaginous matter is deposited; this part of the shell is uucoloured and without A carti- sculpture. very high keel at the laginous aperture, but only over a short distance the last on whorl, and abruptly terminating. (Stage figured by Macdonald, and copied by me, PI. I, fig.