Hi Milan

>seems that my messages are delivered to conch-l wit 3-4 days of
>delay, or they are not delivered at all. So I'm mailing you a copy
>of the message which I unsuccessfully  tried to post to the conch-l.

That's odd. Must be some problem (d'oh) but I can't think of what.
All messages should go straight into the list and wait there for
people to load. Who's running the list just now? (rhetorical
question). I can't think, but I'll forward your message and ask the
listmom to TRY to sort your problem out.

>SUBJECT: SPECIMENS REMOVED FROM ALCOHOL:
>Thank you for reply.
>My question about drying of "alcoholed" specimens may appear in your
>inbox 3 x-I had troubles with delivering the message to the conch-l
>and sent it 3 times in 3 days. Please ignore my extra e-mails with
>subject "shells removed from alcohol". Sorry!
>
>According to my experience Limpets, including Lepetodrilus, survive
>drying without problems. Perhaps the non-coiled shells are not
>exposed to such tension.
>Only L. fucensis is prone to cracking. My specimens literally
>exploded (imploded, properly speaking) when left to dry overnight.

I HOPE these came from the dealer who sells them for low prices!!

>  Nearly all dried fucensis offered by dealers are MORE or less cracked.

Such as the one Poppe had in his "special shells" site.

>Drying of Cyathermia naticoides is also risky.
>I will try Leslie's method with some specimen-can't wait to see the
>results. It sounds logical when Andrew says that slow drying will
>only delay cracking. Hope that cracking will be delayed for, say, 50
>years :)
>
>Another problem with alcohol-stored specimens is that their shells
>slowly dissolve in alcohol.

Try buffering with calcium carbonate. If pateeliform, it might be
best to remove the animal carefully and dry the shell; retain the
preserved animal separately.

>That's why they are best preserved dry . Formalin is acidic and
>therefore even worse.

Yes, bad news. My Lamellaria steransii lost their shells to formalin.

>You need to buffer it with calcium carbonate to prevent dissolution of shell.
>
>PS. Andrew, "Aforia" is still valid. I created this new e-mail
>account because I'm rarely at home and my inbox would choke up with
>conch-l mails. Have 1 Provanna, decollated as always, no
>Clypeosectus.
>This one is interesting because shell has slit which almost splits
>it in two halves.
>Temnocinclis euripes  is Scissurellid which is so split (like
>mid-ocean rift zone) that looks bizarre.
>Check this:
>http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/vents/nemo/explorer/bio_gallery/biogallery1.html

Dratted thumbnails... when you drag & drop to copy, you get the
thumbnail... not the full-sized image, which must be LINKED. Cheapo
site! No taxonomic names either, just meaningless vernacular ones
invented on-the-spot...

Scissurellids are oddballs. Some (Anatoma, Scissurella,
Sukashitrochus, Sinezona) are pretty normal gems, but some have very
reduced slits only present in adults (Incisura = Scissurona, not a
fissurellid at all) and some have no slit at all (Larochea). I think
there's another slitless form being described presently. I'm very
interested in them and have NZ specimens of all of the above
described genera. Of overseas forms I only have Anatoma crispata from
the Pacific NW and and an unidentified Sinezona from the Society
Islands (quite likely undescribed) so far.
--
Regards
Andrew