Hi Rich,
 
Yes, it is plausible that several different populations can be the same
species!  Absolutely. Look at Conus pennaceus.  The population first
named seems to be from E. Africa and yet all the way over in Hawaii are
shells that are also called C. pennaceus.  Conus textile does the same
thing - have a profusion of forms in East Africa and reachs all the way
to Hawaii.
 
My problem with the photos in the Compendium is that the shell photos
appear to be mixed up in that the captions do not agree, in most cases,
with the shell illustrated.  I won't quibble with the illustration of the
holotype of C. coelinae on page 253.  The photo of the specimen of C.
coelinae without the periostracum appears to illustrate the Hawaiian
population.  The photo of C. coelinae labeled as the form spiceri from
Hawaii appears to be C. marmoreus form suffusus (endemic to N.
Caledonia).  The photo of "An elongated, brighter colored form,described
as berdulinus Veillard, 1972. Syn.: "kintoki" appears to be neither the
"typical C. berdulinus from Reunion/South Africa nor the "typical"
kintoki from the Philippines.  It looks like shells from India normally
sold as C. kashiwajimensis Shikama, 1971.  C. kashiwajimensis was
described from Japan.  The type is believed lost.  Roeckel has made a
convincing case for applying this name to an aberrant C. kiicumulus (A
very rare shell from Japan itself).  Roeckel considers the Indian
population a form of C. berdulinus.  I have not carefully read the
reasoning behind this opinion.  Finally, The "Kashiwajima Cone"
illustrated is a typical C. kintoki from the South China Sea/Philippines
population.
 
I have a third printing of the Compendium (1986).  Perhaps the
illustrations and captions have been changed in later printings.
 
Odds are that some of these "C. coelinae complex" cones have the same
ancestors.  Who knows, maybe next year someone will publish a paper
linking these populations (G. Raybaudi did a good job of presenting an
overview of C. pennaceus in La Conchiglia).  I would like to see such an
analysis.  Enough rambling for now.  Thanks for the thought food!
 
Bill Fenzan
Norfolk, VA
 
[log in to unmask]