I would like to do this. My only references are the catalog
by Clover and the last  Vaught classification of the living
mollusca. I have 51 species in my collection.
Regards,
Fred in MN

----------
> From: John Wolff <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Errata
> Date: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 11:59 AM
>
> Hi Tom and others,
>
> >The only thing we would need that could be
> >a bit tough would be a review process to try and ensure
our information
> >was good and we just didn't jump on a published change
without some
> >expert head nods.
>
> Well, there's the rub--and it's a major one. And that is
why the COA Lambis
> Group (I had to go look it up) was put in charge. And we
need to continue
> to work through them.
>
> I have extensive (but not user-friendly) lists of
corrections for many
> publications covering Muricidae, Mitridae,
Costellariidae,
> Coralliophilidae, Volutidae, Pectinidae, and Cardiidae.
But these also
> cover synonymy--which may not be errata nor worthy of
correction. I am
> quite confident about Muricidae (largely based on Emily
Vokes' work),
> Mitridae/Costellariidae (based on Richard Salisbury' s
papers and personal
> correspondence) and Volutidae (based on Patrice Bail's
personal
> communications). Cardiidae are probably in pretty good
shape also based on
> recent papers. As for Pectinidae and
Coralliophilidae--forget anything
> authoritative.
>
> I would like to find a pen-pal to discuss
Coralliophilidae synonymy; is
> there anyone out there?
>
> At 07:16 AM 7/14/99 -0600, you wrote:
> >John,
> >
> >I sort of remember a discussion about compiling
corrections, but it's
> >very hazy.  If you have some stuff, maybe that is the
beginning we
> >need.  I would be willing to compile the various inputs
into a usable
> >format to be published by the "American Conchologist
Magazine" (if Lynn
> >Scheu agrees), or listed on the COA web page (if the web
master agrees),
> >or my own club web page (heck, I'll agree), or someone
else's, or
> >whatever.  I think this is critical information and it
would be nice to
> >get it out to any and all shellers (making the web media
the best and
> >most flexible alternative).  The only thing we would
need that could be
> >a bit tough would be a review process to try and ensure
our information
> >was good and we just didn't jump on a published change
without some
> >expert head nods.  I think we have plenty of Conch-L
members who could
> >fill that role or know someone who could fill that role.
 We would make
> >sure to publish the fact that it was an informal list
and no one was
> >hanging their reputation on the correctness of it --
while at the same
> >time trying our best to keep it current and as correct
as possible.
> >Changes would be dated so anyone using the list would
know if something
> >had been added or deleted since their last perusal.
> >
> >What do you think?
> >
> >Tom Eichhorst in New Mexico, USA
> >
> >John Wolff wrote:
> >>
> >> Back in September 1997, there was a discussion that
the Conch-L group
> >> (name?) would publish errata for popular books on the
Web. Someone (?) was
> >> assigned to do it, and I offered to accumulate the
information.
> >
> >
> John Wolff
> 2640 Breezewood Dr.
> Lancaster, PA 17601, U.S.A.