﻿253 
  

  

  ON 
  SOME 
  MISAPPLIED 
  MOLLUSCAN 
  GENEEIC 
  NAMES. 
  

  

  Ey 
  Tom 
  Iredale. 
  

  

  Read 
  Wi 
  December, 
  1910. 
  

  

  Whilst 
  engaged 
  upon 
  the 
  determination 
  of 
  Kerraadec 
  Marine 
  Molluscs 
  

   I 
  noted 
  some 
  generic 
  names 
  which 
  seemed 
  to 
  require 
  investigation. 
  

   The 
  results 
  of 
  my 
  researches 
  I 
  give 
  lierewith. 
  

  

  Omalaxis. 
  

  

  Omalaxis 
  was 
  introduced 
  by 
  Deshayes 
  (Ency. 
  Method. 
  Vers., 
  vol. 
  iii, 
  

   p. 
  659, 
  1832) 
  for 
  two 
  Eocene 
  fossils 
  : 
  the 
  first 
  was 
  Solarium 
  disjunctum, 
  

   Lamarck 
  (Annals 
  du 
  Mus, 
  Paris, 
  vol. 
  iv, 
  p. 
  55, 
  No. 
  8, 
  1804); 
  the 
  

   second, 
  called 
  Omalaxis 
  hifrons, 
  was 
  unaccompanied 
  by 
  any 
  note 
  of 
  its 
  

   prior 
  appearance 
  in 
  literature. 
  In 
  the 
  Coq. 
  Fossil. 
  Paris, 
  vol. 
  ii, 
  

   p. 
  221, 
  the 
  following 
  year, 
  Deshayes 
  changed 
  the 
  name 
  of 
  his 
  genus 
  

   to 
  Bifrontia. 
  When 
  so 
  doing 
  he 
  mixed 
  up 
  his 
  references, 
  and 
  has 
  

   thereby 
  misled 
  all 
  subsequent 
  writers. 
  After 
  translating 
  into 
  Latin 
  

   the 
  diagnosis 
  of 
  Omalaxis 
  he 
  had 
  previously 
  given, 
  he 
  definitely 
  stated 
  

   " 
  Ce 
  genre 
  est 
  compose 
  du 
  Solarium 
  disjunctum 
  et 
  des 
  autres 
  coquilles 
  

   ..." 
  He 
  then 
  placed 
  Bifrontia 
  hifrons 
  (founded 
  on 
  Solarium 
  bifrons, 
  

   Lamarck, 
  loc. 
  cit., 
  No. 
  9, 
  1804) 
  as 
  his 
  first 
  species, 
  and 
  in 
  its 
  

   synonymy 
  named 
  Omalaxis 
  disjunctus 
  of 
  the 
  Ency. 
  Method. 
  That 
  

   this 
  was 
  purely 
  an 
  error 
  can 
  be 
  easily 
  ascertained 
  by 
  making 
  

   comparisons 
  of 
  the 
  diagnoses 
  given 
  for 
  each 
  species. 
  This 
  action 
  has, 
  

   however, 
  caused 
  the 
  citation 
  of 
  Solarium 
  hifrons, 
  Lam., 
  as 
  the 
  type 
  

   of 
  Omalaxis. 
  As 
  this 
  shell 
  differs 
  conchologically 
  from 
  Solarium 
  

   disjunctum, 
  Lam., 
  it 
  is 
  important 
  that 
  the 
  correct 
  shell 
  be 
  quoted 
  as 
  

   type. 
  From 
  an 
  examination 
  of 
  these 
  Eocene 
  fossils 
  I 
  believe 
  these 
  

   lire 
  subgenerically 
  separable, 
  and 
  it 
  would 
  have 
  been 
  gratifying 
  to 
  

   liave 
  been 
  able 
  to 
  preserve 
  ^^/row^f/rt 
  for 
  the 
  ' 
  bifi'onted 
  ' 
  species, 
  but 
  

   the 
  sentence 
  above 
  quoted 
  forbids 
  this. 
  To 
  those 
  who 
  have 
  not 
  access 
  

   to 
  specimens 
  of 
  these 
  fossils 
  I 
  recommend 
  a 
  study 
  of 
  the 
  Iconographie 
  

   complete 
  Coq. 
  foss. 
  Env. 
  Paris, 
  by 
  Cossmann 
  and 
  Pissarro. 
  In 
  the 
  

   second 
  volume 
  (1909), 
  on 
  pis. 
  xvi 
  and 
  xvii, 
  are 
  given 
  figures 
  of 
  ten 
  

   species 
  of 
  Homalaxis, 
  which 
  show 
  clearly 
  the 
  peculiar 
  characters 
  of 
  

   this 
  group. 
  A 
  fair 
  representation 
  of 
  Solarium, 
  bifrons. 
  Lam., 
  is 
  shown 
  

   by 
  figs. 
  106-11, 
  pi. 
  xvi, 
  whilst 
  the 
  type 
  of 
  Omalaxis, 
  Solarium 
  

   disjunctum, 
  Lam., 
  is 
  well 
  figured 
  on 
  pi. 
  xvii, 
  figs. 
  106-10. 
  

  

  A 
  Sicilian 
  fossil 
  was 
  described 
  by 
  Philippi 
  (Enum. 
  Moll. 
  Sicil., 
  

   vol. 
  ii, 
  p. 
  225, 
  pi. 
  xxviii, 
  fig. 
  11,1 
  844) 
  as 
  Bifrontia 
  (?) 
  %anclcca. 
  A 
  recent 
  

   shell 
  dredged 
  off 
  Madeira 
  by 
  MacAndrew 
  was 
  recorded 
  by 
  Gray 
  (Ann. 
  

   Mag. 
  Nat. 
  Hist., 
  vol. 
  xi, 
  p. 
  260, 
  1853) 
  as 
  identical 
  with 
  Philippi's 
  

   fossil. 
  Gray 
  pointed 
  out 
  that 
  in 
  the 
  recent 
  shell 
  the 
  last 
  whorl 
  was 
  

   uncoiled 
  as 
  in 
  the 
  fossils 
  from 
  Paris, 
  and 
  concluded 
  that 
  Philippi's 
  

   generic 
  location 
  was 
  correct 
  ; 
  the 
  live 
  shells 
  gave 
  the 
  opercular 
  

   characters, 
  which 
  were 
  ' 
  Torinioid 
  '. 
  No 
  other 
  details, 
  as 
  of 
  sculpture 
  

   or 
  measurements, 
  were 
  adduced. 
  Hanley 
  described 
  and 
  figured 
  the 
  

  

  