Dear Aydin,

It lacks some pigmentation, e.g., the lip. Conventional wisdom
characterizes this lens as "Holocene," which means not "exactly" a
fossil and not exactly modern. The term "subfossil" may be useful
here, but I think it is eschewed by the paleontological litterati

Harry


At 07:16 PM 2/16/2010, you wrote:
>Is that really a fossil shell? Amazing that it looks so fresh.
>
>~~Aydin
>http://snailstales.blogspot.com
>http://home.earthlink.net/~aydinslibrary/
>http://www.facebook.com/aydin.orstan
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>[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.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------