Hi again John,

Thank you for your  help and ideas.  The Magilopsis robillardi (Lienard
1870)  does exist in Hawaiian waters and with your help and others, I think
that this is most likely the right identification.  By the way, you called
it by the name Reliquieacava robillardi.  Is Magilopsis  and Reliquieacava
synonymous?

So far, I have identified over 200 separate Hawaiian species in my
collection and I have a long ways to go.  I presently just working on shells
less than 5 cms. and excluding the cones and cowries of which I have a lot.
I'll get to them later.

All the best,
Avril


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Wolff" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 6:09 AM
Subject: Re: Hawaiian Mystery shells


> I agree with Andrew that it is Reliquieacava robillardi . There is a paper
> by C. Massin in Bulletin de L'Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de
> Belgique  57:79-90 1987 which names this new genus and has a very thorough
> study of this species including large detailed illustrations. Contact me
> privately for scans/copies
>
> John
>
>
> >>I've uploaded these new scans and if you have a moment, I would
appreciate
> >>receiving your thoughts on the matter.
> >>(http://www.manandmollusc.net/mystery_shell_avril_hawaii_Juv.html)
> >>
> >>I have put your information on the page as to the atys and juvenile
shells.
> >>The scaphopod I'm still searching for more information
> >>
> >>Thanks for all your help so far and thanks for any and all other
thoughts
> >>and opinions from this GREAT list!
> >
> >Having another look, this time with Kosuge & Suzuki 1985 "Illustrated
> >Catalogue of Latiaxis and its Related Groups" and Clover 1982
> >"Latiaxis Catalog & Illustrated Checklist of Coralliophilidae Family"
> >in front of me,  the more elongate beast appears to be Magilopsis
> >robillardi (Lienard 1870) and the more numerous Magilopsis doesn't
> >appear to match anything in these publications, though it could
> >possibly be Magilopsis. cumingii  (H & A Adams 1863); it does not
> >appear to be Coralliobia fimbriata, which has stronger spiral cords
> >or heavy ribs and which has a broadly-rounded anterior end.
>