Comptopallium pauciplicatum Iredale, 1939
IREDALE, T. 1939. Mollusca. Part 1. Great Barrier Reef Expedition 1928-29, B.M.(N.H.), Scientific Reports., 5 (6): 209-425, pls. 1-7. [p. 360]
Comptopallium pauciplicatum nov. sp.
«The generic features given above may be supplemented by the followin: — Coloration: the right valve is generally unspotted white, the left marked. with small blotches of reddish brown, arranged in interrupted concentric rows subparallel to the ventral edge, and becoming obsolete towards the umbo; there is a splash of colour along the dorsal lines of the ears. The ribs are constantly ten in number, whereas Linné's O. radula had twelve; Bavay notes the discrepant number of ribs cited by authorities, varying from eight to as many as fourteen, but did not attempt to correlate these records with geographical data. He noted that Reeve's P. argenteus (' Conch. Icon.' VIII, pI. xxxv, sp. 168, August, 1853: China Sea) was like the young of "radula", and that it had ten ribs only, although the Philippine Islands "radula" had twelve ribs.
Commonly known as "radula", it was shown eighty years ago that this was not valid, as Linné had not described it, thus: "Ostrea radula Linné (' Syst. Nat.' 10th ed., p. 697, January) was based on 'Rumph. Mus.', t.44, fig.D, Radula, and 'Klein ostr.', t. 9, fig. 34, from O. Indico." The indeterminate description read, "O. testa radiis 12 convexis: striis decussatis crenatis, auriculis aequalibus". The figure of Rumph is not even of a scallop, but is of Lima llima (Auct.). Hanley ('Ipsa Linn. Conch.' p. 104, 1855) pointed this out, but left the matter: "In the tenth edition of the 'Systema', Rumphius, pl. 44, fig. D, and its copy in Klein (pl. 9, fig.34) were inadvertently cited. for a species ('radiis 12'),to which they bear no resemblance; the references were removed in the final edition to Ostrea Lima, and, the present citation substituted (M.L.U. 525, n.105*). The name radula, though appertaining properly to the former figures only, was still retained, and appended falsely to the changed letters ('.Rumph. Mus.' t. 44, figs. A, B, Radula)." Be it noted that neither of Rumph's figures A, B, show "12 radiis", each giving more — A, 14 or 15, and B, 20— and while the former is like the "radula", the latter is of the "pallium" style. Hence, radula cannot be preserved for the Scallop in any manner, and the Queensland shell hitherto so-called is named as above.» TOM IREDALE, 1939
|