>How do you refer to the members of the former genus Strombus when speaking of that group as a whole? In other words, if I tell someone that I collect Strombus, how do they know which group I'm referring to? It's wrong to say I collect Strombidae, because I don't collect Lambis. It is likewise now wrong to say that I collect the genus Strombus, because that would exclude Tricornis, Canarium, Dolomena,etc.
>Thus I would appreciate having a taxon that applies only to the taxa formerly grouped under the genus Strombus (sensu Abbott), but now split into several genera.
>How do we now refer to this group? Neither Strombidae nor Strombus fits. I would like to use the taxon Strombinae to indicate a subfamily of Strombidae, therefore excluding Lambis and others.<

Unfortunately, you are rather unlikely to get a suitable formal taxonomic name.  Lambis appears to have evolved from within the traditional Strombus.  Therefore, any name based on phylogenetic considerations that includes all of the former Strombus would also include Lambis.  Strombinae could be used to refer to some subset of the Strombidae that includes true Strombus, but it would be difficult to justify excluding Lambis while including all the traditional "Strombus" species.

However, you could use the term "sensu lato", abbreviated s.l.  It roughly translates "in a loose sense" and is used to indicate that you are not interpreting the taxon strictly.  Of course, "all Strombidae except Lambis" and "Strombus sensu Abbott" convey what taxa you are talking about, but are not very concise.

I suppose the other alternative would be to change what taxa you collect.

    Dr. David Campbell
    Old Seashells
    University of Alabama
    Biodiversity & Systematics
    Dept. Biological Sciences
    Box 870345
    Tuscaloosa, AL  35487-0345 USA
    [log in to unmask]

That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droitgate Spa