338
N. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR AND M. SUASWATHY
11. THE SYSTEMATICS AND DISTRI~UTION OF THE
TEREDINIDAE
A perusal of the literature on teredinids will show that the taxonomy
of this group has been in a state of utter confusion ; the description of
one species could include several allied forms. The variations in
taxonomical characters exhibited by individuals are so wide that exact
determination of a species is extremely difficult. No other group seems
to have a more unsatisfactory classification than the Teredinidae, as
pointed out by several earlier authors. The reasons for this state of
affairs have been : (1) many of the species included under this group
have been created on the basis of fragmentary material, regardless of
the wide range of variation exhibited by these bivalves ; (2) the locality
of the type species has not been accurately determined; (3) many
new species have been described on the basis of zoo-geographic provinces, without taking into serious consideration their means of dispersal ; (4) authors had described several new species without reference
to all the earlier publications which were scattered and often unavailable. This has unfortunately resulted in the creation of many invalid
species.
While the taxonomy of the Teredinidae was in this state of confusion, Turner (1966) undertook the compilation of a comprehensive
work to “ make available a catalogue of all the names used in the
family Teredinidae; to illustrate as many of the type specimens as
possible, giving descriptive notes concerning them, and to indicate
synonyms whenever this could be done.” Turner had the rare opportunity, not available to many earlier taxonomists of this group, of
examining many type specimens, an essential prerequisite for an
attempt of this kind. Undoubtedly this work represents a milestone in
the literature on the subject and will be an important work of reference
for all future workers.
Turner’s classification differs from that of earlier workers in that
she has taken into consideration some features of the anatomy of the
soft parts, and also the structure and manner of growth of the pallets,
besides the conventional criteria for classification. Recognizing as
many as fourteen genera, she discarded the usage of subgenera owing
to the occurrence of transitional species between them. Turner divided
the family Teredinidae into three subfamilies, namely Kuphinae Tryon,
including the mud-boring genus Kuphw Guettard, Teredininae Rafinesque, w&h includes nine genera of shipworms, Bactronqhorua
Tapparone-Canefri, Neoteredo Bartsch, Dicyathver Iredale, Teredothyra Bartsch, Teredora Bartsch, Uperotzcs Guettard, Psiloteredo
N. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR AND M. SUASWATHY
11. THE SYSTEMATICS AND DISTRI~UTION OF THE
TEREDINIDAE
A perusal of the literature on teredinids will show that the taxonomy
of this group has been in a state of utter confusion ; the description of
one species could include several allied forms. The variations in
taxonomical characters exhibited by individuals are so wide that exact
determination of a species is extremely difficult. No other group seems
to have a more unsatisfactory classification than the Teredinidae, as
pointed out by several earlier authors. The reasons for this state of
affairs have been : (1) many of the species included under this group
have been created on the basis of fragmentary material, regardless of
the wide range of variation exhibited by these bivalves ; (2) the locality
of the type species has not been accurately determined; (3) many
new species have been described on the basis of zoo-geographic provinces, without taking into serious consideration their means of dispersal ; (4) authors had described several new species without reference
to all the earlier publications which were scattered and often unavailable. This has unfortunately resulted in the creation of many invalid
species.
While the taxonomy of the Teredinidae was in this state of confusion, Turner (1966) undertook the compilation of a comprehensive
work to “ make available a catalogue of all the names used in the
family Teredinidae; to illustrate as many of the type specimens as
possible, giving descriptive notes concerning them, and to indicate
synonyms whenever this could be done.” Turner had the rare opportunity, not available to many earlier taxonomists of this group, of
examining many type specimens, an essential prerequisite for an
attempt of this kind. Undoubtedly this work represents a milestone in
the literature on the subject and will be an important work of reference
for all future workers.
Turner’s classification differs from that of earlier workers in that
she has taken into consideration some features of the anatomy of the
soft parts, and also the structure and manner of growth of the pallets,
besides the conventional criteria for classification. Recognizing as
many as fourteen genera, she discarded the usage of subgenera owing
to the occurrence of transitional species between them. Turner divided
the family Teredinidae into three subfamilies, namely Kuphinae Tryon,
including the mud-boring genus Kuphw Guettard, Teredininae Rafinesque, w&h includes nine genera of shipworms, Bactronqhorua
Tapparone-Canefri, Neoteredo Bartsch, Dicyathver Iredale, Teredothyra Bartsch, Teredora Bartsch, Uperotzcs Guettard, Psiloteredo