A Review of the Status of Orconectes inermis Cope and a Suggested Nomenclatorial Change

Abstract

The blind crayfishes of the caves under the Cumberland Plateau have excited the curiosity of visitors and scientists since 1806. Written accounts are numerous and more than a century of conflicting literature has been produced. Hobbs brought this volume of material together when he revised the genus Cambarus in 1942. Tellkampf (1844) described the blind crayfish from Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, under the name, pellucidus. Erichson (1846) placed it in his new genus Cambarus where it remained until Creaser (1933) raised Fowler's subgenus Faxonius to generic rank restricting the genus Cambarus. Hobbs found this status existing when he began working on the crayfishes in the late thirties. With the description of Cambarus australis Rhoades (1941) from Alabama caves, it became evident that the hooks on the fourth walking legs represent a significant character for generic determination. In light of this new evidence, Hobbs (1942) redefined the genus. In naming the group, he pointed out that the genus Faxonius of Fowler (1912) was invalid by rule of priority. He further emphasized that one member of the genus had already been designated by the name Orconectes by Cope (1872). Thus, upon the erection and description of a separate genus, Cope's Orconectes must be applied. This generic change has met with popular approval and during the last fourteen years crayfish taxonomy has moved forward with new species described in most of the five new genera. Cope, though an eminent zoologist, was not a student of crustacea. When he visited the Indiana caves with Professor E. T. Cox, the state geologist, public announcements were expected from this wellknown scientist. The Indianapolis Journal of September 5, 1871 carried his off-the-cuff remarks regarding the mysterious denizens of the subterranean depths. The account specifically mentioned the blind crayfish, Astacus pellucidus given him by the state geologist. Cope's position as a carcinologist was hardly enhanced by his use of a generic name then nearly twenty-five years out of date! He did not even edit the error out of the account before it appeared in the Annals and Magazine of Natural History (1871: 368-370). In spite of his unfamiliarity with the field and apparently without consulting authorities on the group, he proceeded to name a new genus and a new species a few months later based upon a single second form male from Wyandotte Cave (Cope, 1872:419). The publication had no sooner appeared than Dr. Hermann Hagen, who had revised and monographed the crayfishes the year before, published a stinging satire (Hagen, 1872) on the hard-