Strophiops perantiquaxx Maynard and Clapp in Maynard, 1920
Maynard, 1919a:15 [nomen nudum; Maynard, 1919b:31 [nomen nudum]; Maynard and Clapp in Maynard, 1920d:115, pl. 1, figs. 1, 2, Map 1, 2 (published as Map 1, 1); Harasewych et al., 2007:462-464, fig. 139.
Maynard, 1919b: 47.
The binomen Strophiops peravita was used by Maynard (1919b:47) as a example of a species with a conically tapering shell, and was accompanied by a reference to subsequently published figures (Maynard, 1920d:pl. 1, figs. 1, 2) that were captioned "S. perantiqua M. & C.". Article 10.1.1 (ICZN, 1999:9) states that if publication of the data relating to a new nominal taxon or a nomenclatural act is interrupted and continued at a later date, the name or act becomes available only when the requirements of the relevant Articles have been met. Strophiops peravita became available on November 6, 1919, based on the publication of the meager description, which was adequate to meet the requirements of the relevant article [Article 12.1 (ICZN, 1999:16)], rather than from the later publication of the captioned figure. Authorship is attributed to Maynard, the sole author of the description, rather than to Maynard and Clapp, as specified in the caption to the subsequently published illustrations. Ironically, this is the only time that Maynard used the binomen Strophiops peravita. It is a lapsus calami as Maynard used the name Strophiops perantiqua in two prior (Maynard, 1919a [October 16]:15; Maynard, 1919b [November 6]:31; both nomina nuda) and one subsequent (Maynard and Clapp in Maynard, 1920d [September 30]:115, Map 1, 2, pl. 1, figs. 1, 2) reference to this taxon. The figure referred to in the inadvertent description of S. peravita is the identical figure referenced in the intended description of this taxon [as Strophiops perantiqua], which noted it was "contemporary with S. avita Mayn."
While it seems clear that Maynard intended the taxon to be known as perantiqua, it is not possible to consider peravita as an "incorrect original spelling" within the confines of Article 32.5.1 (ICZN, 1999:39), since there is no clear evidence to suggest an alternative spelling within the original publication itself. The name S. peravita did not appear in the Batchelder (1951) compilation of Maynard's taxa, nor in Clench's (1957) catalog of Cerion taxa. The lectotype of S. peravita is also the lectotype of Strophiops perantiqua Maynard and Clapp in Maynard, 1920, which is a junior objective synonym of S. peravita [see Taxon 139, below].
Maynard (1924a:164) described in detail the locality in which these fossils were collected. Clench & Aguayo (1952:440) considered this taxon to be "the remnant of a hybrid colony, possibly a cross between the scalarinum element and a member of the glans complex."
Search for additional records in the collections of:
The National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution
The Field Museum of Natural History
GenBank® (NIH genetic sequences database)