Would someone please clarify the difference if any in the names
"Pleurotomaria hirasei" and "Perotrochus hirasei," which seems to be the
name of the mystery Pleurotomariidae mentioned in this and earlier CONCH-L
Digests? Are these synonymous names? A&D, 2000, seem not to use the genus
name, Perotrochus.

Although something of a novice, I examined the shell here discussed
<http://www.manandmollusc.net/mystery_shell_avril.html> with one that we
have locally, in the Archerd collection
<http://nighthawk.tricity.wsu.edu/museum/ArcherdShellCollection/gastropoda/P
leurotomariidae.html>. The Archerd shell was originally labelled Perotrochus
hirasei, and except for a slightly shorter slit length, our shell is
otherwise quite like the Pleurotomaria hirasei shell pictured in A&D, 2000.
Our shell was collected in Japan in 1960.

Thank you.

Burton Vaughan

> From: Automatic digest processor <[log in to unmask]>
> Reply-To: Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 00:00:23 -0500
> To: Recipients of CONCH-L digests <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: CONCH-L Digest - 18 Mar 2002 to 19 Mar 2002 (#2002-65)
>
> From: Monsecourbrothers <[log in to unmask]>
>> Reply-To: Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:59:50 +0100
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Mystery Pleurotomariidae
>>
>> Dear avril and Ross,
>>
>> This shell is a Perotrochus hirasei. It is much heavier than teramachii and
>> the spire is completely different. For a good reference take the book "The
>> living pleurotomariidae" by Anseeuw and Goto. This book covers all recent
>> species (27) described before 1996. Since then there are two new species
>> described: P. indicus and P. boucheti.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Kevin