I've received a shell that I believe was misidentified.  I'm hopeful that
somebody might help - not just with the ID of this shell but perhaps
suggestions for the approach those of you with more experience at this (that
means all of you) have found to be most efficient.

The data with the shell was minimal.  It indicated that it was a specimen of
Conus terebra from "just inside reef - Pacific Coast side of Okinawa".  I
don't have many physical specimens to compare it with (only three) but I
found the shell immediately suspect because the spire outline was concave -
not convex.

Anyhow - here's what I can describe:

Morphometry:  L = 72mm; RD = .56; PMD = .88; RSH = .13.   I don't have a
scale so can't provide any information having to do with weight but so far
all the values fall into the range provided by RKK for C. terebra.

As I said the spire outline is concave.  The shoulder is angulate.  The
sutural ramp is slightly concave and there are light spiral striae and light
radial growth lines.

Below the shoulder the shape is pretty much straight but there's a slight
bulge about 1/3rd of the way up from the base with the area above and below
the bulge slightly concave so the straight shape may be a bit of an optical
illusion.

The aperture is white and wider at the base than it is at the shoulder.

There appear to be no "variably spaced and variably fine spiral ribs from
base to shoulder" as described by RKK and as certainly evident in the three
other specimens I have.

The ground color is white with very light broad bands of yellow on each side
of center.  The yellow coloring within each broad band varies in intensity
on the last whorl from quite noticeable near the aperture to almost nothing
near the lip.

Of all the shells shown in the RKK book the closest in looks is #8 of Plate
19 - an example of C. consors.  The problem is that Okinawa appears to be
well out of the depicted range on the map in RKK.

Of course I'm interested if anybody can identify this particular specimen
but, as I said earlier, I'm really interested in knowing the general
approach to identification that those of you with lots of experience take.
For example - for a particular species do you look for specific attributes
or combinations of attributes unique to that species?  Do you put a lot of
weight on the location when you know the data is reliable - for example if
this shell is really from Okinawa should I immediately dismiss the
possibility of it being C. consors?  Also - has anybody attempted building a
computerized approach to identification for any species of molluscs?

Thanks in advance for any responses.

Brooke Selmer
Barrow, AK

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com