﻿210 
  MARINE 
  MOLLUSCA 
  DESCRIBED 
  BY 
  P, 
  P. 
  CARPENTER 
  

  

  ". 
  . 
  . 
  P.Z.S. 
  1856, 
  p. 
  208. 
  Slender: 
  like 
  thin 
  A. 
  gmisapata, 
  with 
  Purpuroid 
  operc." 
  [Car- 
  

   penter, 
  1864b, 
  p. 
  663] 
  

  

  The 
  holotype 
  of 
  this 
  species 
  has 
  not 
  been 
  found. 
  It 
  is 
  not 
  reported 
  in 
  the 
  types 
  of 
  the 
  

   Gould 
  Collection 
  (27th 
  Ann., 
  Rept. 
  New 
  York 
  State, 
  p. 
  47), 
  in 
  Albany, 
  New 
  York. 
  It 
  is 
  not 
  

   in 
  the 
  British 
  Museum 
  (G. 
  L. 
  W'ilkins, 
  Oct. 
  17, 
  1950. 
  i)crsonal 
  communication). 
  

  

  Holotype. 
  — 
  Not 
  found 
  

  

  Distribution. 
  — 
  Recent. 
  Santa 
  Barbara, 
  California 
  (type) 
  ; 
  Kodiak, 
  Alaska, 
  to 
  San 
  Diego, 
  

   California. 
  Pleistocene. 
  California 
  (Oldroyd, 
  1925; 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale). 
  Pliocene. 
  California 
  

   (Moody, 
  1916 
  fide 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale; 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale) 
  

  

  Mitrella 
  tuberosa 
  (Carpenter) 
  

   ( 
  PI. 
  26, 
  figs. 
  9-12) 
  

  

  Amvcia 
  tnhcrnsa 
  C.xrpkxtkk, 
  1864b, 
  p. 
  537, 
  539, 
  628, 
  662; 
  Reprint, 
  1872, 
  p. 
  22,, 
  25. 
  114, 
  148; 
  

   1865, 
  Ann. 
  Mag. 
  Nat. 
  Hist., 
  .ser. 
  3, 
  vol. 
  XV, 
  p. 
  398; 
  Reprint. 
  1872, 
  p. 
  288; 
  Cooper, 
  1867, 
  

   Geog. 
  Cat. 
  Moll., 
  Geol. 
  Sur. 
  California, 
  p. 
  2,7; 
  1870, 
  Amer. 
  Jour. 
  Conch., 
  vol. 
  VI, 
  p. 
  68; 
  

   1888, 
  7th 
  Ann. 
  Rept. 
  California 
  State 
  .Min. 
  Bur., 
  p. 
  229; 
  Pace, 
  1902, 
  Malacol. 
  Soc. 
  Lon- 
  

   don. 
  Proc, 
  5, 
  p. 
  146 
  

  

  Columbella 
  (Mitrella) 
  tiihcro.m 
  (Carpenter), 
  Tryon, 
  1883, 
  Man. 
  Conch., 
  vol. 
  V, 
  p. 
  135, 
  

   pi. 
  50, 
  figs. 
  40, 
  41 
  

  

  Astyris 
  tuberosa 
  (Carpenter), 
  Keep, 
  1887, 
  West 
  Coast 
  Shells, 
  p. 
  36 
  

  

  Columbella 
  (Astvris) 
  tuberosa 
  (Carpenter), 
  Willi.\mson, 
  1892, 
  U. 
  S. 
  Nat. 
  Mus., 
  Proc, 
  

   vol. 
  15. 
  no. 
  898, 
  p. 
  213, 
  pi. 
  XX, 
  fig. 
  6; 
  Arnold, 
  1903, 
  p. 
  240, 
  pi. 
  X, 
  fig. 
  7; 
  1907, 
  U. 
  S. 
  

   Geol. 
  Sur., 
  Bull., 
  no. 
  321, 
  pi. 
  XI, 
  fig. 
  10 
  

  

  Columbella 
  {Alia) 
  tuberosa 
  (Carpenter), 
  Dall, 
  1921, 
  p. 
  103; 
  Oldroyd, 
  1924, 
  Pub. 
  Puget 
  

   Sound 
  Biol. 
  Station, 
  vol. 
  4, 
  p. 
  97 
  

  

  Columbella 
  tuberosa 
  (Carpenter), 
  Oldroyd. 
  1927, 
  vol. 
  II, 
  pt. 
  1, 
  p. 
  271 
  

  

  Mitrella 
  tuberosa 
  (Carpenter), 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale. 
  1931. 
  p. 
  697, 
  pi. 
  26, 
  fig. 
  45 
  see 
  for 
  addi- 
  

   tional 
  synonymy; 
  Baily, 
  1935, 
  West 
  Coast 
  Shells 
  (Keep), 
  p. 
  231; 
  Keen, 
  1937, 
  p. 
  40; 
  

   WooDRiNG, 
  Bramlette, 
  AND 
  Kew, 
  1946, 
  U. 
  S. 
  Geol. 
  Sur., 
  Prof. 
  Paper 
  207, 
  p. 
  77; 
  

   BuRCH, 
  1945, 
  no. 
  51, 
  p. 
  13, 
  14, 
  16; 
  Smith 
  and 
  Gordon, 
  1948, 
  California 
  Acad. 
  Sci., 
  

   Proc, 
  ser. 
  4, 
  vol. 
  XXVI, 
  p. 
  187; 
  Abbott, 
  1954, 
  p. 
  223 
  

  

  "Very 
  close 
  to 
  minor, 
  Scacchi, 
  but 
  with 
  diflferent 
  nucleus. 
  8-10 
  fm. 
  c. 
  Cp." 
  [Carpenter, 
  

   1864b, 
  p. 
  662] 
  

  

  Oldroyd 
  (1927) 
  republished 
  part 
  of 
  the 
  original 
  description 
  of 
  this 
  species. 
  To 
  her 
  copy 
  

   should 
  be 
  added 
  the 
  following 
  to 
  make 
  the 
  notes 
  complete: 
  

  

  ". 
  . 
  . 
  div. 
  30°, 
  

  

  "Hab. 
  Sta. 
  Barbara, 
  recent 
  and 
  fossil 
  (Jezcett) 
  ; 
  coast 
  of 
  California 
  north 
  to 
  Monterey; 
  

   Catalina 
  Island, 
  8-10 
  fathoms 
  (Cooper). 
  

  

  "As 
  this 
  belongs 
  to 
  a 
  group 
  of 
  closely 
  allied 
  species 
  of 
  Nassoid 
  Columbellae, 
  a 
  minute 
  

   diagnoses 
  is 
  giveiL 
  The 
  fossil 
  specimens 
  are 
  larger, 
  and 
  have 
  the 
  remarkable 
  nucleus 
  more 
  

   perfect 
  than 
  any 
  of 
  the 
  recent 
  shells 
  yet 
  seen. 
  In 
  appearance 
  it 
  scarcely 
  differs 
  from 
  the 
  

   small 
  variety 
  of 
  the 
  ^Vlcditerrancan 
  A. 
  minor, 
  Scac. 
  ; 
  but 
  that 
  (with 
  A. 
  corniculafa) 
  has 
  a 
  

   Chrysodomid 
  nucleus, 
  the 
  Californian 
  an 
  Alaboid." 
  [Carpenter, 
  1865h, 
  p. 
  398] 
  

  

  The 
  type 
  material 
  of 
  this 
  species 
  consists 
  of 
  five 
  specimens 
  on 
  Carpenter 
  original 
  glass 
  

   mounts 
  in 
  the 
  Redpath 
  Museum. 
  They 
  have 
  an 
  original 
  label, 
  "Astyris 
  tuberosa 
  Cpr. 
  type 
  

   Sta. 
  Barbara 
  fossil 
  Jewett." 
  The 
  nuclear 
  whorls 
  are 
  well 
  preserved 
  and 
  consist 
  of 
  about 
  

   3^2 
  whorls, 
  the 
  first 
  minute. 
  The 
  nuclear 
  whorls 
  are 
  globose 
  and 
  differentiated 
  from 
  the 
  

   postnuclear 
  whorls. 
  Carpenter 
  commented 
  especially 
  on 
  the 
  fine 
  preservation 
  of 
  the 
  nucleus 
  

   of 
  the 
  fossil 
  shells. 
  

  

  Syntypes.''^'^^ 
  — 
  Redpath 
  .Museum, 
  No. 
  73 
  

  

  Distribution. 
  — 
  Recent. 
  Santa 
  Barbara, 
  California, 
  to 
  Forrester 
  Island, 
  Alaska, 
  to 
  Gulf 
  

   of 
  California 
  (Dall). 
  Pleistocene. 
  Lower 
  Santa 
  Barbara 
  formation, 
  Santa 
  Barbara, 
  Cali- 
  

   fornia 
  (type); 
  California 
  Arnold; 
  Oldroyd, 
  "var." 
  1925; 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale; 
  Willett, 
  1937; 
  

   W'oodring. 
  Bramlette, 
  and 
  Kew; 
  Mexico 
  (Jordan, 
  1926). 
  Pliocene. 
  California 
  (Cooper; 
  

   Arnold; 
  Berry, 
  1908; 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale; 
  "var." 
  Woodring 
  and 
  Bramlette, 
  1950). 
  Miocene. 
  

   California 
  (Gale 
  in 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale) 
  

  

  '"•■' 
  Statement 
  in 
  Oldroyd 
  ( 
  1927), 
  followed 
  by 
  Grant 
  and 
  Gale 
  (1931) 
  that 
  the 
  type 
  might 
  

   be 
  in 
  the 
  British 
  Museum 
  is 
  incorrect. 
  

  

  