CONCH-L Archives

Conchologists List

CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Conchologists List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Marien Faber <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:09:44 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Conchologists List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
Conchlers,

From a fellow malacologist I have received the original description of C.
glorioceanus. There is no mentioning of a different genus, only a comparison
to C. gloriamaris and C. ammiralis.  Compared with C. gloriamaris the
authors mention several differences: (1) In both species the finely
reticulated tent-pattern forms darker bands, but the dark bands in C.
glorioceanus are not as elaborate and do not form separate patches as it is
often the case in C. gloriamaris. My comment: note the word "often", and
remember there is only a single C. glorioceanus. This means that between
both nominal species there is no difference in colour pattern at all. (2)
The new species differs from Conus gloriamaris by the broad shape, the
carinate shoulder, [and] the concave outline of the spire. My comment: Small
(i.e. subadult C. gloriamaris has carinate shoulders too, only later the
shoulders become more rounded. The broad shape and the (slight) concave
spire both are determined by the low spire of this individual shell. (3) the
much smaller size [of C. glorioceanus]: about one-third of large specimens
of Conus gloriamaris. My comment: if you see a single, 5 ft tall Dutchman
then you cannot claim that the Dutch form a species different from Homo
sapiens characterized by smaller size. A fair comparison needs multiple
specimens of both nominal taxa. (4) the protoconch of C. glorioceanus is
white, in C. gloriamaris it is pink. My comment: this might be of specific
importance and need further research. Is the protoconch of C. gloriamaris
always pink? Unfortunately the protoconch in C. glorioceanus is too poor to
be used in a differential diagnosis and protoconchs of C. gloriamaris are
not figured.
Further the authors compare C. glorioceanus with C. ammiralis. The number of
differences between the two is the same as between C. ammiralis and C.
gloriamaris.

Marien

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[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