184 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. XXI, April 1967 
IX, fig. 13; Thiele, 1929:343, fig. 409) of the 
radula of Metz geria alba (Jeffreys, 1873) (syn. 
Meyeria pusilla 'M. Sars’ G. O. Sars, 1878) 
with the figure given by Habe reveals indeed 
a very close similarity; while the radulae of 
Turbinella jus us Sowerby, 1825, as published 
by Dali (1885:346, pi. XIX, fig. 1; Abbott, 
1950:202, pi. 89, fig. 2) and of T. laevigata 
Anton, 1839 (Thiele, 1929:342; Abbott, 1950: 
202, pi. 89, fig. 3) also show a similarity, al- 
though the relationship is less close. 
A more strikingly close relationship is re- 
vealed by a study of the radulae of what Dali 
described as Daphnella ( Surculina ) cortezi 
(Dali, 1908:292) from off San Diego, Cali- 
fornia, and TLeucosyrinx galapagana (Dali, 
1919:5, pi. 3, fig. 2) from the Galapagos 
Islands. The type species of Surculina, Daph- 
nella ( Stirculina ) blanda Dali (1908:291, pi. 
3, fig. 1) is certainly congeneric with S. cortezi, 
for which Dali in 1918 proposed the generic 
name Phenacoptygma (Dali, 1918:138), plac- 
ing it in the family Volutidae. This genus was 
placed in the subfamily Calliotectinae by Pils- 
bry and Olsson (1954:19). 
The genus Surculina Dali, 1908 (Dali, 
1908:260-261), with its synonym Phenaco- 
ptygma Dali, 191 8, therefore also must be 
placed in the family Turbinellidae. 
Surculina was considered to be a subgenus of 
Leuco syrinx by Grant and Gale (1931:509- 
510), who assigned both blanda and gala- 
pagana to this subgenus. Powell (1942:21) 
follows this allocation, placing the group in 
the subfamily Cochlespirinae. 
In order to make this relationship more clear, 
and because the type species of Surculina ap- 
parently has never been figured and the figures 
of the other species may not be readily acces- 
sible to all students, I am illustrating all three 
species of Surcidina (Figs. 7-9). In addition, 
I am figuring the radula of S. cortezi (Fig. 10) 
and, for comparison, that of Benthovoluta 
hilgendorji (Fig. 11). 
Another genus that probably belongs here 
is Ptychatractus Stimpson (1865:59) with three 
species: the type of the genus, P. ligatus 
Mighels and Adams, 1842, from the Gulf of 
Maine; P. occidentalis Stearns, 1873, from 
Alaska; P. calif ornicus Dali, 1908, from Mon- 
terey Bay to San Diego, California. A rather 
poor figure of the radula is given by Stimpson 
(1865: pi 8, fig. 8). 
I have used the family name Turbinellidae 
instead of Xancidae or Vasidae for the follow- 
ing reason. 
In 1957, in Opinion 489 of the International 
Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, the 
generic name Turbinella Lamarck, 1799 was 
validated and placed on the Official List of 
Generic Names, and Xancus Roding, 1798 was 
suppressed and placed on the Official Index 
of Rejected and Invalid Names. Concurrently, 
the family name Turbinellidae Swainson, 1840 
was placed on the Official List of Family Group 
Names in Zoology. A perusal of the history of 
this case (Hemming, 1957:155-178) reveals 
the fact that whereas six persons are cited as 
supporting the use of Turbinella, eight opposed 
it. Of these eight, six were professional mala- 
cologists (one a paleontologist) , while three 
malacologists (only one of them a professional 
worker) supported the proposal, siding with a 
botanist, an ichthyologist, and an anthropol- 
ogist. 
In spite of the preponderance of opposition 
against the proposal, and the clear evidence of 
the very limited use of Turbinella in recent 
scientific literature, the proposal was approved 
and Opinion 489 was issued as summarized 
above. 
Disturbed by the action of the International 
Commission in passing a ruling so contrary to 
the majority of considered opinion, many mala- 
cologists have refused to follow the recom- 
mendation, and have continued to use Xancus 
and Xancidae, apparently hoping for an even- 
tual reversal of this Opinion. This procedure, 
however, appears to me to be unwise. If we 
wish to have any kind of stability in nomen- 
clature, and if the decisions of the International 
Commission on Zoological Nomenclature are 
to have any meaning, we must accept the final 
decisions of the Commission, particularly as 
regards names placed on the official lists. What 
scientific workers must do in the future is to 
act promptly to prevent decisions by the In- 
ternational Commission on Zoological Nomen- 
clature that are contrary to the evidence and 
majority opinion. 
In his monograph of several genera of the 
family Vasidae in the Indo-Pacific, Abbott 
