Eocypraea undetermined

Groves, Lindsey & Squires, Richard L., 2023, Revision of northeast Pacific Paleogene cypraeoidean gastropods, including recognition of three new species: implications for paleobiogeographic distribution and faunal turnover, PaleoBios 40 (10), pp. 1-52 : 27

EOCYPRAEA SP. CF. E. INFLATA ( LAMARCK, 1802)

FIGS. 8G–I

Eocypraea castacensis ( Stewart, 1926 [1927]). Vokes, 1939, p. 154 [in part], pl. 20, fig. 14 [not fig. 9, = Bernaya kaylinae n. sp.].

Cypraea castacensis (Stewart) . Ingram, 1942. p. 103 [in part], pl. 8, fig. 6 [not fig. 5, = Bernaya kaylinae n. sp.].

Eocypraea (Eocypraea) moumieti Dolin and Dolin, 1983 . p. 36. Groves, 1997. p. 8. Not Eocypraea moumieti Dolin and Dolin, 1983 . Not Eocypraea inflata var. moumieti Dolin and Dolin, 1983 . p. 46.

Eocypraea (Eocypraea) sp. cf. E. (E.) inflata ( Lamarck, 1802) . Groves, 2011. p. 50, figs. 11, 12. Groves and Squires, 2021. p. 231.

Referred Specimen—Hypotype (of Vokes, 1939, of Ingram, 1942, of Groves, 2011) UCMP 15815 (Figs. 8G–I), length 27.3, width 18.7 mm, height 15.1, UCMP Locality A-1282.

Occurrence— Domengine Formation, middle Eocene, Reef Ridge, Fresno County, central California .

Etymology— Originally from Latin inflata for the highly inflated shell.

Remarks— The hypotype of Vokes (1939), Ingram (1942), and Groves (2011) most closely resembles Eocypraea inflata ( Lamarck, 1802) from middle Eocene (Lutetion/Bartonian) strata of France, Belgium, and England. This is particularly evident from the illustra- tions of Cossmann (1903: pl. 9, figs. 18, 19), Cossmann and Pissaro (1911: pl. 32, fig. 162-7), and Wenz (1941: fig. 2882). It superficially resembles Luponovula maniobraensis ( Squires and Advocate, 1986) from the lower Eocene (“Capay Stage”) Maniobra Formation of Riverside County, southern California. Luponovula maniobraensis is more elongate, has coarser dentition, has a prominent basal callus, and is larger than Eocypraea sp. cf. E. inflata .

Dolin and Dolin (1983: p. 37, table on p. 46 [as Eocypraea inflata var. moumieti ]) reported Eocypraea moumieti Dolin and Dolin, 1983 , which is known from the Gan Basin, Pyrénées Atlantique Department, France, as also occurring in California. They reported that this California occurrence is questionably “ castacensis ” Vokes, 1939, but Vokes was not the author of castacensis . That particular specimen (hypotype UCMP 33808 of Vokes, 1939) is now Bernaya kaylinae n. sp. In summary, E. sp., cf. E. inflata ( Lamarck, 1802) occurs very rarely in the NEP region, whereas E. moumieti Dolin and Dolin, 1983 does not occur in this region.

Perrilliat et al. (2003: p. 48, pl. 2, figs. 33, 34) reported a specimen of a middle Eocene cypraeoidean as E. (E.) inflata ( Lamarck, 1802) [hypotype IHN 6736] from the San Juan Formation, Chiapas, southern México. Unfor- tunately, this specimen is too poorly preserved to afford a positive identification.