﻿SYSTEMATIC 
  DESCRIPTIONS 
  

  

  EXPLANATORY 
  REMARKS 
  

  

  Mrs. 
  Ida 
  Oldroyd's 
  four-part 
  manual 
  (1924-1927) 
  Marine 
  Shells 
  of 
  the 
  West 
  

   Coast 
  of 
  North 
  America 
  has 
  furnished 
  and 
  will 
  continue 
  to 
  be 
  a 
  comprehensive 
  

   universal 
  reference 
  for 
  West 
  Coast 
  workers. 
  Original 
  descriptions 
  of 
  the 
  majority 
  

   of 
  Carpenter's 
  species 
  are 
  included 
  in 
  that 
  text, 
  and 
  such 
  quotations 
  are 
  not 
  re- 
  

   peated 
  in 
  this 
  report. 
  On 
  comparing 
  the 
  quoted 
  descriptions 
  in 
  Oldroyd 
  with 
  the 
  

   originals 
  one 
  finds 
  that 
  the 
  last 
  remarks 
  including 
  the 
  localities 
  of 
  the 
  original 
  

   descriptions 
  are 
  omitted 
  in 
  nearly 
  every 
  case. 
  Since 
  the 
  original 
  locality 
  and 
  final 
  

   remarks 
  are 
  in 
  many 
  cases 
  the 
  crux 
  in 
  deciding 
  debatable 
  questions 
  that 
  portion 
  

   of 
  the 
  remarks 
  must 
  be 
  included 
  in 
  original 
  data. 
  Attention 
  is 
  called 
  to 
  such 
  omis- 
  

   sions 
  and 
  quotation 
  of 
  the 
  same 
  herein. 
  Opinion 
  52, 
  International 
  Rules 
  of 
  Zoo- 
  

   logical 
  Nomenclature 
  stipulates 
  : 
  

  

  "The 
  citation 
  of 
  the 
  type 
  locaHty 
  of 
  a 
  species 
  is 
  not 
  sufficient 
  to 
  establish 
  a 
  name 
  under 
  Article 
  

   25a 
  of 
  the 
  Code. 
  If 
  specific 
  characters 
  are 
  given 
  in 
  addition 
  to 
  the 
  type 
  locality, 
  the 
  type 
  local- 
  

   ity 
  becomes 
  a 
  part 
  of 
  the 
  description 
  and 
  is 
  to 
  be 
  considered 
  as 
  an 
  important 
  element 
  in 
  de- 
  

   termining 
  the 
  identity 
  of 
  species." 
  

  

  To 
  anyone 
  who 
  has 
  followed 
  Mrs. 
  Oldroyd's 
  text 
  and 
  that 
  of 
  Dall 
  (1921) 
  it 
  

   becomes 
  apparent 
  that 
  she 
  followed 
  Dall 
  in 
  details 
  of 
  reference, 
  authors, 
  and 
  re- 
  

   marks. 
  Where 
  typographical 
  errors, 
  omissions, 
  and 
  errors 
  of 
  fact 
  are 
  in 
  Dall, 
  they 
  

   are 
  repeated 
  in 
  Oldroyd. 
  In 
  a 
  large 
  number 
  of 
  the 
  copies 
  in 
  Oldroyd 
  of 
  the 
  Car- 
  

   penter 
  original 
  descriptions, 
  typographical 
  mistakes 
  are 
  numerous. 
  Such 
  correc- 
  

   tions 
  are 
  inserted 
  in 
  the 
  text 
  of 
  the 
  discussions 
  of 
  the 
  species 
  in 
  this 
  paper. 
  This 
  

   has 
  not 
  been 
  done 
  in 
  a 
  spirit 
  of 
  criticism 
  but 
  only 
  so 
  that 
  time 
  and 
  labor 
  may 
  be 
  

   saved 
  for 
  others 
  who 
  do 
  not 
  have 
  access 
  to 
  the 
  original 
  articles 
  of 
  Carpenter. 
  

   Even 
  the 
  1872 
  Reprint 
  by 
  the 
  Smithsonian 
  Institution 
  of 
  many 
  of 
  Carpenter's 
  

   papers 
  is 
  out 
  of 
  print 
  and 
  unobtainable 
  by 
  most 
  people. 
  

  

  ^Measurements 
  in 
  Carpenter's 
  text 
  are 
  referred 
  to 
  as 
  poll, 
  (pollex 
  = 
  thumb) 
  

   or 
  without 
  such 
  designation. 
  In 
  the 
  Preface 
  to 
  the 
  Mazatlan 
  Catalogue, 
  the 
  ex- 
  

   planation 
  states 
  that, 
  "all 
  measurements 
  of 
  length 
  are 
  given 
  in 
  inches 
  and 
  decimal 
  

   portions." 
  Where 
  "poll." 
  is 
  not 
  inserted 
  in 
  his 
  data, 
  the 
  writer 
  assumed 
  the 
  meas- 
  

   urements 
  to 
  be 
  in 
  inches 
  and 
  used 
  25.4 
  mm. 
  to 
  an 
  inch 
  to 
  convert 
  the 
  measure- 
  

   ments 
  into 
  modern 
  usage. 
  In 
  the 
  article 
  on 
  the 
  new 
  species 
  from 
  California 
  

   (1865g, 
  p. 
  133, 
  footnote) 
  Carpenter 
  defined 
  pollex 
  as 
  2.53 
  cm. 
  Hertlein 
  and 
  

   Strong 
  noted 
  (1946, 
  p. 
  76) 
  that 
  Dr. 
  Teng-Chien 
  Yen 
  investigated 
  the 
  length 
  of 
  

   pollex 
  while 
  at 
  the 
  British 
  Museum 
  and 
  stated 
  the 
  measurement 
  to 
  be 
  approxi- 
  

   mately 
  2 
  cm. 
  Since 
  the 
  writer 
  used 
  Carpenter's 
  measurements 
  it 
  would 
  seem 
  that 
  

   one 
  would 
  arrive 
  nearer 
  his 
  results 
  by 
  using 
  his 
  definition 
  of 
  pollex. 
  The 
  differ- 
  

   ences 
  are 
  slight 
  between 
  the 
  three 
  figures 
  for 
  the 
  type 
  of 
  measurements 
  involved. 
  

  

  In 
  the 
  Mazatlan 
  Catalogue, 
  Carpenter 
  (1857, 
  p. 
  Ill) 
  defined 
  measurements 
  

   for 
  the 
  bivalves 
  as 
  : 
  "long, 
  from 
  the 
  umbo 
  to 
  the 
  middle 
  of 
  the 
  ventral 
  margin 
  ; 
  

   lot. 
  from 
  the 
  anterior 
  to 
  the 
  posterior 
  ends 
  ; 
  alt. 
  the 
  thickness 
  of 
  the 
  closed 
  

   valves." 
  But 
  in 
  his 
  later 
  papers 
  (1864a, 
  p. 
  311, 
  footnote) 
  he 
  changed 
  this 
  defini- 
  

  

  57 
  

  

  