Dear all,

Solatopupa similis (Bruguiere, 1792)
Chondrina avenacea (Bruguiere, 1792)
Trichia rufescens (Da Costa, 1778)
Trochoidea trochoides (Poiret, 1789)
Trochoidea elegans (Gmelin, 1791)

Helmut


Helmut "Helix" Nisters
Franz-Fischer-Str. 46
A-6020 Innsbruck / Austria / Europe
phone: 0043 / 512 / 57 32 14
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
web:    www.netwing.at/nisters/
           (please visit it and sign guestbook)
always looking for shellgrit from all over the world
for my nearly 89 years aged mother Irmgard
to makes happy and to keep up her health

office:
Natural History Department of the
Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum Innsbruck
Feldstrasse 11 a
A-6020 Innsbruck / Austria / Europe
phone: 0043 / 512 / 58 72 86 - 37
web: www.tiroler-landesmuseum.at
        (specimen donations to the
         Tiroler Landesmuseum molluscs collection
         are always appreciated)

----------
Dear Ross and others of course,

I forgot one malacologist:

E. Mendes da Costa who published in 1771 and 1778

on European landshells before 1790 I found (with exception of Müller):

Cochlostoma septemspirale (Razoumowsky, 1789)
Subulina octona (Bruguière, 1789)
Nesovitrea hammonis (Ström, 1765)
Clausilia bidentata (Ström, 1765) (and Ström described in 1768 Nassarius
incrassatus).
Trichia villosa (Studer, 1789)
Perforatella bidentata (Gmelin, 1788)
Isognomostoma isognomostoma (Schröter, 1784)

Gijs

----------
> Van: Ross Mayhew <[log in to unmask]>
> Aan: [log in to unmask]
> Onderwerp: Why only Muller between 1767 and 1792
> Datum: woensdag 14 juni 2000 2:35
>
> There may be a simple explanation, but it has always seemed odd to me
> that from Linneues' establishing of the modern binomial system in 1758,
> hardly any molluscs appear to have been described before Hwass in 1792,
> except for Chemnitz and Muller, and Linne himself: during this 34 year
> period, it seems that one can count the number of Molluscan taxonomy
> papers on the fingers of one or two hands - why????  Virtually
> everything was in need of a binomial name then, and explorers must have
> been dragging new species back to Europe at a brisk pace - so why were
> so few eager scientists, amateur or otherwise, involved in describing
> new species?  Is this also the case in other phyla??
>
> Enquiring minds want to know, in the the Great Still-chilly North (risk
> of frost last nite - was 36 F on my doorstep!),
> Ross.