251 



FURTHER DATA ON POLI'S GENERIC NAMES. 

 By Dr. William Healey Dall. 



Mead 8ih January, 1909. 



I WAS interested to read the article on Poli and his nomenclature by 

 Mr. Jukes-Browne in the June issue of the Proceedings of the Society. 

 "With his general conclusions I am in full agreement. The question 

 whether Poli used a binomial or Linnaean system of nomenclature can 

 only be answered in the negative, and consequently his names, as 

 such, have only an historical value. They remained available for 

 any binomialist who might choose to validate them, and take date 

 only from such validation. By this I do not mean that a mere reference 

 to a name of Poli would suffice, unless it was made evident that the 

 author had the intention of adopting it binomially. 



Mr. Jukes-Browne cites seven of Poli's names which "have been 

 used conchologically " by subsequent authors, by which I understand 

 him to mean that they have been adopted in preference to other names 

 by those authors. He is, however, in error in supposing that I desire 

 to reject or have rejected any names properly proposed which had 

 previously been used by Poli. If he had carried his investigations 

 a little further he would have found that, on the contrary, I had 

 accepted such names, or at least two of them. Let us examine these 

 names in the order Mr. Jukes-Browne has cited them. 



(1) Peroncea was adopted by Morch in 1853 (Yoldi Catalogue, 

 pt. ii, p. 12), but Albers had used Peronceus for a land shell in 1850 ; 

 Peronea, Curtis, and Peronia, Blainville, date from 1824, and Peronia, 

 Desvoidy, from 1830. The two latter are of different derivation, but 

 near enough to be confusing. The existence of Albers' name is 

 sufficient, according to present usage, to make a new name necessary 

 for the Peroncea, Morch ; for which accordingly I proposed Peronidia. 



(2) Callista was used by Leach (published by Gray in 1852) for 

 a group of Yeneridoe, distinct from that for which Poli had used it, 

 and which had been named Claiisina by Brown in 1827. Callista is 

 therefore a synonym of Claimna. The diilerent application of Callista 

 by Morch in the Polian sense in 1853 was therefore futile. 



(3) Arthemis was validated by Oken in 1815, but Bosinia, Scopoli, 

 antedated Artlmnis by thirty-three years. 



(4) Loripes was validated by Cuvier in 1817, and I have adopted 

 it in my Synopsis of the Lucinacea, 1901, p. 803. 



(5) Glossus was validated by Oken in 1815, but Isocardia, Lamarck, 

 antedates the validation by fifteen years. 



(6) Argus had been validated by Bohadsch, 1761, and Scopoli, 1777, 

 before Poli took it up in 1795. 



(7) Axincca when proposer, by Poli in 1791 was already named 

 Glycymeris by Da Costa, in 1778, with the type of Area glyeymeris, 

 Linne. 



Of the names for the shells, as distinguished from the animals, 

 Laphnoderma was proposed by Morch for Area Bomingensis, Lamarck, 



