Barbara, Carole, Stanley, Henk, et al,
 
This is a bit of a delayed reaction, but on the matter of plica vs
striatus...
 
My initial feeling is that I would have to agree with Henk.  However,
without having seen the holotypes for these species, I can't offer more
than an opinion based on material in my own collection and those
specimens I've seen through the years.  On that basis, I would say that
striatus and plica are, indeed, the same with subplicatus being merely a
'stepped' form of plica and velutinus a flattened form.  Apparently,
Schumacher's separation of striatus was heavily dependant on geography
and insufficient for separation (which is certainly not an isolated
incidence of misjudgement). Of these four, velutinus has my attention for
consistantly being the least like the others and has the greatest
arguement in terms of morphology and geographic isolation for being a
valid species separate from plica. Unfortunately, popular books
containing pectens and the fact that most dealers have sold these species
interchangeably have only added to the confusion.  This and other
problems within the family are compelling reasons to attend (and
participate in) an international conference on Pectinidae proposed for
May 2000 here in San Diego.
 
Kim Hutsell
 
-------
 
> I'm in complete agreement with your opinion on the plica complex.  In
> addition, Schumacher's separation was based on too little material and
> I have found flaws in his geographic boundries.
>
> Bret Raines