Tom,
Yes, by all means use Bratcher and Cernohorsky.  At least for this week.
 
How 'bout I just send you a reprint of the paper and you scan it in.  I
don't have many copies left, but can let go of one more.  I am still a
little gun shy on that scanning/sending thing.  By the time I figure it
out, you won't remember why I'm sending it to you.  Please send your US
mail drop point.
 
I agree with all your comments on the beauty of the various terebrids.  My
biggest terebrid thrill was scooping two T. guttata up in one handful of
sand during a night snorkel in Palau.  Not real big ones, but not bad either.
 
Send your address.  I'll get the imitatrix paper to you.
 
Kurt
 
 
 
At 12:04 PM 3/11/99 -0700, you wrote:
>Kurt,
>
>Great start and I appreciate the information on Hastula.  As for the
>taxonomy, I find this family is as confusing as the turrids will be if
>anyone ever really looks into them.  I was very conformable calling all
>in the family terebra until I read the "Living Terebras of the World"
>and found they (authors Bratcher & Cernoohorsky) break the family into
>the genera: Terebra, Duplicaria, Hastula (with subgenus Impages), and
>Terenolla.  They also list 41 or so previous genus and subgenus name
>applied to this family.  I still have all of mine labeled as Terebra
>with the actual genus name (if other than Terebra) in parenthesis, i.e.
>Terebra (Hastula) salleana.  I know, I know, not the accepted or correct
>way, but if anyone complains I just kick them out of my
>shell/computer/herp room.  My excuse for the incorrect labels has always
>been that I was waiting for the name game to settle out.  So my question
>to you, is the taxonomy given in the Terebra book current and accepted?
>And second, can you send a scanned picture of your Terebra imitatrix?  I
>would like to slip it into my book.
>
>Tom Eichhorst in New Mexico, USA
>
>By the way, I think the Terebra (Hastula) lanceata and the Terebra
>(Hastula) strigilata are two of the best looking terebras going when it
>comes to color and pattern.  When it comes to shape, my vote is for the
>Terebra triseriata for its almost unreal thin shape and fine sculpture
>and finally, of the large guys, Terebra commaculata seems to combine the
>nice, thin shape with a good strong pattern.
>