Dear Art,

I don't think that the similarity of Olivella with Oliva has got anything
to do with mimicry. As far as I know, both Olivella and Oliva are buried
beneath the surface during the day, and only emerge at night for foraging.
What can be seen at nght under water in the environment where these
mollusks live, and what would be the use of mimicry then?

There is indeed a tendency towards conservatism by collectors when new
names (especially on genus or family level, or even higher) are introduced.
However, research goes on, and one (i.e. professionals, not me, I am an
amateur) can draw the conclusion that old views are not longer valid. I
fully concur with Patty when she states: "(...) and it really isn't up to
amateurs like us to say that 'because it looks similar it can't be
different'."
In the recent past there have been some major changes e.g. within
Patellidae (no longer considered to be "Archeogastropods", the dismissal of
Archeogastropods as a whole, being a grade rather then a clade; the
recognition of the families Cystiscidae and Pleioptygmatidae (originally
included in resp. Marginellidae and Mitridae) and a lot more.
Many of these actions were done based on solid research by important
malacologists, such as McLean, Ponder, and many others. We can only try to
understand their work, and humbly follow (if we think they are correct;
remember that these proffessionals don't always agree, debate often goes on
for over a decade).

Gijs


----------
> Van: Art Weil <[log in to unmask]>
> Aan: [log in to unmask]
> Onderwerp: Re: Olivellidae??
> Datum: vrijdag 27 augustus 1999 20:33
>
> Dear Gijs;-
>         (first, tell me how to pronounce "Gijs")
>         Do the differences between Ollivella and Oliva outweigh the
> similarities? I know (from Dawkins) that there are beetles that can look
> like termites but clearly aren't. I don't think there is any such
> advantage to be gained in Oliva/Olivela mimicry. Like a good many
> others, I am not ready to change my labels. Not yet. It does seem to me
> that species members in "all" families have physical characteristics
> that are similar. Certainly, and in spite of papers to the contrary,
> physical similarities must be taken into consideration.
>         So I'll wait.
>         Art