C. floridensis is indeed a synonym for C. anabathrum (see WoRMS), therefore, the records for WRS listed for the 2 different names need to have the smaller size eliminated, and the name listed correctly.  The problem with the current philosophy for listing in the WRS is that past larger specimens were eliminated from the listing simply because someone else came along and submitted an actual photo of their specimen which then was allowed to replace the legitimate larger specimen.  I use 2 different editions of the WRS list because the more recent (2015) edition I have has false listings.

John

John and Cheryl Jacobs
Seffner, FL
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Conchologists List <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Doug Thompson
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2018 3:59 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CONCH-L] Help with proper Taxonomy for Conus anabathram Cross, 1865.

Hello to all.  On a recent kayak trip to the 10,000 islands my guide and I found a very large C. anabathram.  He gave it to me so I decided to measure it.  It measures 55.35 mm.  I checked the WRS web site and found that the shell I have is much larger than the current record so I attempted to register it.  I wanted to register it in my buddies name and return it to him with a WRS certificate as a surprise.  I submitted the paperwork and two photos just like I have done in the past, but hit a brick wall.  Phillipe came back to me with a message stating he could not tell if the shell was anabathram anabathram or anabathram floridensis.  He asked for me to send him better photos, which I did.  He also wanted me to contact Ed Petuch to see what he thought, which I did.  I have been doing research on the species and found out that the shell known as floridensis is actually a synonym for anabathram and that no other species name applies.  This is in spite of the fact WRS has a shell called anabathram floridensis and anabathram anabathram.  I have sent photos to other collectors, all of whom agree with me the shell is anabathram and the other name is not a valid name.  I have battled this before with WRS and decided to ask the cone experts in the group to comment and let me know their take.  I have found Florida cones on many occasions and the person who found this one has actually found several thousand.  After my long winded explanation I ask simply is C.anabathram the appropriate name for the Florida cone or is there another species that could compete for the id.  This shell came from very near Marco Island, Florida in the Gulf of Mexico.  I can provide photos via email if you like.  thank you, Doug Thompson

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