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:
David Kirsh <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Conchologists List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 25 Jul 2006 21:24:24 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (113 lines)
John,

I'm wonderin' if yours could be a third species.

David Kirsh

-----Original Message-----
>From: John Timmerman <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Jul 25, 2006 2:41 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: neverita delessertiana
>
>
>
>
>In a message dated 7/16/2006 1:42:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
>
>In a message dated 7/16/2006 12:43:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
>David,
>
>I have found "sympatric" (crabbed, otherwise perfect  shells) N. duplicata
>and N. delessertiana (Recluz in  Chenu, 1843) the be common along the north
>shore of Little St. George Is.,  Appalachicola Bay, Franklin Co., Florida on
>several consecutive summer  visits. The latter species predominated in a ratio of
>about 10:1. This is  less than twenty miles WSW of suitable habitat in the
>Carrabelle  area.
>
>I have never seen shells of N. delessertiana collected  from anywhere but
>Gulf of Mexico waters.
>
>Harry
>
>
>At 12:04 PM  7/16/2006, you wrote:
>
>The representative of Neverita  duplicata in my collection was donated by the
>owner of the motel on Estero  Island, FL, when my parents took me there in
>1966. Sure enough, it's  delessertiana.
>
>The edge of the operculum has been chewed into a  fine powder by some
>critter. What's that likely to be?
>
>Which  Neverita predominates in the scallop dumps from dredging off
>Carabelle? I  recall that there were Neveritas but I didn't bother with them at the
>time.
>
>David Kirsh
>
>
>
>
>I finally have a chance to download the article and read it carefully as  I
>have collected these shells for years so am most interested in any new
>findings on them. Sorry for the delay and that I was not on conch-L the  first time
>this discussion circulated. If I am repeating something already  said forgive
>me for that.
>
>The specimens of Neverita duplicata I collected at Sandy Hook, New Jersey  in
>the late 1980's definitely fit the description of N. delessertiana.  I also
>have specimens from the Outer Banks, NC that fit  the latter description. Both
>groups are dead collected shells so no soft  tissue would have been available
>for diagnostic study. I am  using the shape of the umbilical callus, more
>importantly the shape of  the umbilicus to differentiate the two and height of
>shell to a lesser  extent. Both of the locales I have N. delessertiana from are
>well  outside the researcher's defined range of the species. Additionally how
>does one classify transitional specimens - it is to say those  Neverita that
>exhibit a mixture of traits of both as some I have from the  Outer Banks do?
>
>Gene mapping is an important tool in defining species and I do not  doubt its
>validity but as for diagnosing dead shells I am confused. I too  had often
>wondered about the very different two extremes found in N.  duplicata.
>
>For a long time I prized the N. delessertiana appearing shells as  they are
>relatively scarce compared to N. duplicata on the Outer Banks.  At Sandy Hook
>Euspira heros out numbered them about 100 to 1 so they  were still scarce when
>factoring "moon snails" as one type of shell. At  Sandy Hook they were the
>only Neverita I found.
>
>John  Timmerman
>
>
>
>One of the authors, Michael Hollamnn contacted me off list, after my last
>posting and invited me to share with him photographs of the shells that  were
>confusing me. He generously examined my large collection of photos and  wrote to
>me his conclusion on the shells I have. He also sent to  me close-up photos
>of Neverita delessertiana to aid my  understanding.
>
>What I have are definitely not Neverita delessertiana, I know that now.  They
>may be atypical to the better known form of Neverita duplicata, but
>definitely are not Neverita delessertiana.
>
>John Timmerman
>
>


The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I found it!) but 'That's funny ...'

Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2