Hello!
 
Please excuse me if this is a respost. Bill Gates struck again while I
was posting this something about illegal operation (must be his lawyers
or crummy software).
 
Hi,
 
RichG mentioned geographical ranges and possible geographic forms or
whatever for kintoki, coelinae and berdulinus. May I add Conus martensi
EA Smith 1884. This, "similar" to the mentioned species, not rare but
hard to get cone has several populations; Natal, Madagascar and Somalia.
The RKK book has Conus alconelli da Motta 1986 as a synonym for
martensi (poor da Motta seems to get the short end most of the time). I
have specimens from Natal labeled martensi but no way to do a physical
comparison to types (I suppose with unlimited time and money for travel
I could but I will not). Does anyone have information on the
differences, if any, between martensi and alconelli?
 
Another subject;
 
Are subspecies of inferior rank? A mollusc is described/authored today
and another is described/authored tomorrow as a subspecies of the first.
If it was the other way around it is because of time tagging, luck or
whatever for the particular mollusc being the nominate species. Yet when
species - subspecies are being discussed in terms of populations an "out
of the way" smaller population tagged as a subspecies "seems" to be
addressed as of inferior rank ie a deviation from the norm, the norm
being the major population. At least this seems to be the connotation.
I vote to delete the subspecies title and go with forms or varieties
(though not legal with the ICZN). It is only fair to the poor molluscs.
Didnt EO Wilson try this once and got shot down?
 
Later,
 
 
Emilio Jorge Power
 
 
Later,
 
 
Emilio Jorge Power