CONCH-L Archives

Conchologists List

CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Monfils, Paul" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:56:26 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
Thanks to all who took a peek at the two shells Bret posted for me on
www.Molluscs.net, and offered possible ID's.

I'll have to take Andrew's word for it on the Melongena bispinosa, since I
never heard of the species, don't have a single reference to it in my
library, and no-one suggested any other possible name.

As for the Murex, folks have suggested three different names, either on
Conch-L or privately.  I guess I'm just hard to please, but I don't think
this shell matches any of those names, for the following reasons:

Murex chrysostoma, while having some features in common with my shell, is a
southern Caribbean species.  My shell is from the Philippines.

Haustellum rectirostris is a much more slender and delicate shell, with a
smaller body whorl, finer sculpture, longer spines, and a much longer siphon
canal.  I have a number of specimens of this for comparison.  My shell is
wide, solid, and quite heavy for its size.

Haustellum gallinago is an intriguing possibility.  The shape and sculpture
match pretty closely.  It is supposed to be from Japan, but this wouldn't be
the first Japanese shell to turn up in the Philippines.  However, the
Japanese specimens are small, drab colored, and virtually spineless.  Mine
are larger, brightly marked, and have short, sharp spines.  I'm still
looking at this possibility though.

However, I am starting to lean more toward Murex kiiensis.  Any opinions on
this?

Thanks.
Paul M.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2