Correspondence between a friend & myself about
the validity of the name "westralis whitehead
1987" for the north Australian pleurotomariid.
Looks like it's undescribed, and the name is a
nomen nudum. Can anyone clarify further? I
haven't seen anything but Anseeuw & Goto.

It may well be that "westralis" is B. tangaroana (Bouchet & Métivier 1982).

The friend is the one replying below...

>>DAMN, I can't find my reprint of Harasewych... and I've had a REALLY good
>>look for it... so I can't check. Are you sure that HSN note isn't a
>>reference to an original description elsewhere?
>
>Whitehead's HSN letter basically says "I heard
>about a new slit shell named westralis, can
>anyone give me the citation?"  The citation to
>which she refers was probably Slack-Smith, hence
>the assumption that she validated the name,
>which, IMHO, she did not, for the reasons
>previously cited.  Oh, and I forgot to add that
>that (and every) issue of HSN carries a
>disclaimer that it is not valid for publication
>of new taxa, which was added after earlier
>complaints of inadvertent validations therein.
>
>>Ah, here's an explanation. in Anseeuw & Goto 1996 "The Living
>>Pleurotomariidae"... p169:
>>
>I have Anseeuw & Goto, and I read this, but disagree with their conclusions.
>
>>"The combination
>>of name, illustration and description necessary for the establishment of
>>a new taxon came about by accident in the publication of a letter by Mrs
>>Thora Whitehead to the Hawaiian Shell News in 1987, in which she
>>connected the taxon with specimens described by Okutani & Goto (1985).
>
>Au contraire!  There is a name, but the
>illustration is noted as *not* "westralis," and
>there's *no* description!
>
>>"The name westralis was subsequently used by Coomans and Wagner, who in
>>1990 further proposed the sharp keel on the whorl face and the size of
>>the columellar callus as definitive of the species and designated a
>>specimen previously donated by My Y. Goto (the present author) as the
>>lectotype."
>
>It can't be a lectotype, since that has to be
>selected from among a type series, of which
>there is none.  I haven't checked Coomans &
>Wagner, but if they managed to validate the
>name, it should be cited as from them, not
>Whitehead.
>
>>To my knowledge B. tangaroana only occurs on the Kermadec Ridge and some
>>other seamounts off the extreme north of the North Island. Though I
>>imagine it will be found elsewhere with further exploration.
>>
>The specimens weren't located more specifically than "New Zealand."
>
>>That's what I followed initially. But there ARE consistent differences,
>>subtle though they are.
>
>I don't deny that.  I'm just wondering whether
>"westralis" is or has a valid name.

--
Andrew Grebneff
Dunedin, New Zealand
64 (3) 473-8863
<[log in to unmask]>
Fossil preparator
Seashell, Macintosh & VW/Toyota van nut
________________________________
I want your sinistral gastropods!
________________________________
Opinions in this e-mail are my own, not those of my institution
_______________________________________________
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is top posting frowned upon?