XIV LITERATURE OF SCAPHOPODA. 



1895. H. SIMROTH, Scaphopoda, in Bronn's Klassen und Ord- 

 nungen des Thier-Reichs, new edition, Vol. iii, pp. 356-467. This 

 contains the best recent general account of the anatomy and onto- 

 geny of the class, and includes a bibliography of papers upon these 

 subjects. 



1896. S. CLESSIN in the Systematisches Conchy lien- Cabinet, IV, 

 Abth. 5, Heft x, Lieferungen 422, 424, pp. 1-48, pi. 1-11, gives a 

 monograph of Scaphopoda which is not only one of the worst mono- 

 graphs in that justly famous series, but perhaps the most ineffective 

 example of monographic work to be found in modern conchological 

 literature. Purporting to cover the genera Dentalium, Antalis, 

 Siphonodentalis (blunder for Siphonoentalis'), Siphonodentalium, Cad- 

 ulus, Diwhides and Gadus, it is not only extremely incomplete in 

 all of them, but the generic limits are everywhere singularly mis- 

 understood. Thus " Dentalium " actually contains species of nearly 

 all the other genera admitted, etc., etc. Most of the figures and 

 descriptions are copied from the Conchologia Iconica, and credited 

 to Reeve instead of Sowerby. The synonymy is often hopelessly 

 muddled, and all borrowed. The author does not seem to have 

 actually seen more than a half dozen species ; and of the three 

 " new species" described, one is a worm tube, another probably not 

 distinct from D. rubescens Dh., and the third an absolute synonym 

 of D. pretiosum Nutt. Clessin apparently had neither the mono- 

 graphs of Deshayes or Chenu before him, and the important works 

 of Watson on the ' Challenger,' and Dall on the ' Blake ' Scapho- 

 poda were unknown to him. Several specific names are misspelled. 



See table on next page for summary. 



DISTRIBUTION OF SCAPHOPODA. 



The Scaphopods are in no respect remarkable or anomalous in 

 distribution, as compared with Gastropod or Pelecypod mollusks. 

 So many species belong to the deep sea fauna that the lists of spe- 

 cies under the conventional " Provinces " are somewhat misleading, 

 comprising a shore element with species haviug the range and 

 limitations of the shore fauna generally, and a deep water element 

 with more widely distributed species, frequently common to two or 

 more of the provinces defined by shore mollusks. It is the pre- 

 valence of deep water forms which swells the list of North Atlantic 

 and Gulf of Mexico species to large proportions compared to Indo- 

 Pacific regions. The latter are as yet almost untouched by the 

 dredge. 



