The Hawaiian Species of Conus (Mollusca: Gastropoda) 1 ALAN J. KOHN2 IN THECOURSE OF a comparative ecological currents are factors which could plausibly study of gastropod mollus ks of the genus effect the isolation necessary for geographic Conus in Hawaii (Ko hn, 1959), some 2,400 speciation . specimens of 25 species were examined. Un­ Of the 33 species of Conus considered in certainty ofthe correct names to be applied to this paper to be valid constituents of the some of these species prompted the taxo­ Hawaiian fauna, about 20 occur in shallow nomic study reported here. Many workers water on marine benches and coral reefs and have contributed to the systematics of the in bays. Of these, only one species, C. ab­ genus Conus; nevertheless, both nomencla­ breviatusReeve, is considered to be endemic to torial and biological questions have persisted the Hawaiian archipelago . Less is known of concerning the correct names of a number of the species more characteristic of deeper water species that occur in the Hawaiian archi­ habitats. Some, known at present only from pelago, here considered to extend from Kure dredging? about the Hawaiian Islands, may (Ocean) Island (28.25° N. , 178.26° W.) to the in the future prove to occur elsewhere as island of Hawaii (20.00° N. , 155.30° W.). well, when adequate sampling methods are extended to other parts of the Indo-West FAUNAL AFFINITY Pacific region. As is characteristic of the marine fauna of ECOLOGY the Hawaiian Islands, the affinities of Conus are with the Indo-Pacific center of distribu­ Since the ecology of Conus has been dis­ tion . The Hawaiian Islands mark the north­ cussed in detail elsewhere (Kohn, 1959), eastern limit ofmost of the species that occur ecological data are restricted to notes in this there. Eastern Pacific species of Conus are en­ report. tirely absent from the Hawaiian fauna. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the con­ Most of the species present in Hawaii range stant stimulation and willing assistance of widely throughout the central and western Karl W. Greene, director, Children 's Museum Pacific Ocean , Indian Ocean , and Red Sea. of Honolulu, and Edwin H . Bryan, Jr. , cu­ The chief mode of distribution is the pelagic rator of collections, Bernice P. Bishop Mu­ veliger larval stage. Drifting while attached seum, Honolulu. The collections and libraries to floating material may be a secondary of the following institutions were also visited, mechanism. Despite the extensive distribu­ and gratitude is expressed to the persons in tion of most of the species occurring in charge: U. S. National Museum (H . A. Hawaii, the geographic position of the archi­ Rehder, J. P. E.Morrison), Academy of Nat­ pelago and the prevailing westerly surface ural Sciences of Philadelphia (R. T. Abbott), Museum of Compa rative Zoology, Harvard 1 Contribution No. 1I 7, H awaii Marine l aborator y. M anuscript received July 30, 1957. University (W. J. Clench, R. D . Turner), and 2 Osborn Zoological l aboratory,Yale University, Bernice P. Bishop Museum (Y. Kondo). In and Hawaii Marine Laboratory, Un iversity of Hawaii. Present address: De partm ent of Biological Sciences, addition, specimens were loaned to the writer Florida Stare University, Tallahassee, Florida. for study by C. A. Allen, Mrs . Jean Bromley, 368 Hawaiian Conus-KOHN 369 Mrs . A. M . Harrison, W. C. Ross, and C. S. writers (Blainville, 1818; Reeve, 1843-1844; Weaver. Valuable assistance rendered by Adams and Adams, 1858; Weinkauff, 1874; Charles E. Cutress in preparation of the color Smith, 1879; Tryon, 1884; Fischer, 1887; von photographs is gratefully acknowledged. Martens and Thiele, 1903; Tinker, 1952; and Most of the work was carried out at the Os­ Morris, 1952) have cited the names as they born Zoological Laboratory , Yale University, appear in Bruguiere (1792). A third group of during tenure of a fellowship from the Na­ writers (Dautzenberg, 1937; Clench, 1942; tional Science Foundation. Mermod, 1947; and Dodge, 1953) has cited such names as, e.g., " Conus catus Hwass in BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES Bruguiere.', An excellent bibliographical account and Application of the Regles of the Interna­ collation of the major works in which species tional Commission on Zoological Nomen­ of Conus were described 'is given by Hanna clature (ICZN), and later provisions and and Strong (1949) . Except where otherwise clarifications of the Regles, does not lead to noted, the collations cited therein are fol­ an unequivocal solution to this problem. In lowed in the present paper. the decisions of the ICZN meeting in Paris Catalogue of the Portland Museum. 1786. in 1948, it was recommended (Bull. Zool. This catalogue was published anonymously, Nomencl. 4: 565-566, 1950) that "where in a but its authorship is usually attributed to book or paper written by one author (say George Humphrey (Dall, 1921). The names author 'A') it is clearly stated that the descrip­ of new species are attributed to Daniel tion ofone or more specified taxonomic units Solander in the volume, and the same usage there named has been prepared exclusively by is followed in the present paper. A valuable some other author (say author 'C), the name discussion of this catalogue is given by Wil­ or names in question are to be attributed to kins (1955), who also presents cogent reasons author 'C, not to author 'A'. The name of for attributing the names to Humphrey. the taxonomic unit so described and named J.G. Bruguiere, Encyclopedie Mhhodique. His­ is to be cited by later authors as having been toire Naturelle des Verso 1792. Many previously published by 'C in A'." undescribed species of Conus were named and It is apparent from the remarks ofBruguiere carefully described in this work . However, (1792: 598; see also Clench, 1942: 3) that the the authorship to be attributed to these descriptions of the species were not prepared names has been a matter of dispute almost exclusively by Hwass, although the names since the volume appeared. In the volume, and brief Latin diagnoses were. It is, how­ Bruguiere attributes the names and Latin diag­ ever, the present author's opinion that Hwass's noses of species to C. H. Hwass (p. 598). contribution is sufficient to justify attributing Bruguiere states that he himself wrote the authorship of the names to him. This view is descriptions and the "additional" synonymy strengthened by the more recent further clari­ (see Clench, 1942: 3). New specific names fication ofArticle 21 (Copenhagen Decisions, are published in the volume as, e.g. "Conus 1953: 58-59), which states that "the rule set catus Hwass." out on pages 565-566 of vol. 4 of the However, many subsequent writers (La­ BULLETIN should be qualified in such a marck, 1810; Dillwyn, 1817; Kiener, 1845­ way as to make it clear that it applies only 1850; Wood, 1856; Sowerby, 1857-1858; where the book or paper concerned contains Schaufuss, 1869; Iredale, 1929; Tomlin, 1937; a clear indication that not only the name in Cotton, 1945; Hanna and Strong, 1949; Hi­ question was proposed by some author other rase, 1954; and Kira, 1955) have cited such than that by whom the book or paper was species as, e.g. "Conus catus Bruguiere." Other written but also that the indication, defini- 370 PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. XIII, October, 1959 tion, or description on which, under Article 218) which gives 1846 as the year of publica­ 25, the availability of that name depends was tion of the plates. This date, however, is written not by the author of the book or erroneous, being presumably a typographical paper concerned but by the author to whom error. The correct date is 1845 as given in the the name is there attributed. " body of the paper (Sherborn and Woodward, For these reasons, the species of Conus re­ 1901: 217). Therefore, the names in Kiener's ferred to as, e.g. " Conus catus Hwass" in work should date from 1845 rather than from Bruguiere (1792) are herein cited as, e.g. the dates on which they appeared in the text." " Conus catus Hwass in Bruguiere." Toml in (1937) has given the most com­ Museum Calonnianum. 1797. The names in­ plete catalogue of the genus Conus. Some troduced in this publication were rejected in 2,700 names are listed, including both extant Opinion 51 of the ICZN (Smithsonian Pub!. and fossil species. Earlier catalogues of Re­ 2060, 1912: 116), but this decision has not cent species are given by Reeve (1843-1849), been universally accepted. Ofthe names listed Kiener (1845- 1850), Sowerby (1857- 1858), in the Museum Calonnianum, only three, all and Tryon (1884) . of which are synonyms, are pertinent to this Earlier published lists of the species of paper. For the sake of completeness, they are Conus in Hawaii are those of Garrett (1878), listed in brackets in the synonymies. Author­ Edmondson (1933, 1946), Tinker (1952, ship of the Museum Calonnianum is attrib­ 1958), and Greene (1953).Extensive unpub­ uted to George Humphrey, follow ing general lished lists compiled by W. A. Bryan in 1919, acceptance. The problem is discussed in de­ and by E. H . Bryan, J r. in 1956, have been tail by Iredale (1937). made available to the writer by E. H . Bryan,Jr. Museum Boltenianum. 1798. The names in this volume were accepted as nomenclatori­ SYNONYMY ally available in Opinion 96 of the ICZN The synonymies consist of the first known (Smithsonian Misc. Coli., 73(4): 16-18, 1926), publication of all known different names, au­ and their authorship was attributed to P. F. thors, and combinations which have been R6ding in Direction 48 of the ICZN (O pin­ appl ied to the species, listed chronologicall y. ions and Declarations Rendered by the ICZN, Subsequent references to the same name are 1: 255-264, 1956).