In a message dated 02/18/2000 12:36:35 PM EST, [log in to unmask]
writes:

<<
         I have noticed lately that some malacologists and conchologist are
using  "Nodipecten nodosus" instead of "Lyropecten nodosus."  But one leaves
"antillarum" in the Lyropecten genus.  What is correct, and does this have to
do with the fact that fossil, knobby Pectenidae are labelled "Nodipecten?"

         Thanks in advance,
                         Linda >>

Dear Linda,
  the species antillarum is desperately in need of a new genus. It is in the
Tribe Decatopectinini, with Somalipecten, Bractechlamys etc. It has been
temporarily put into the genus Bractechlamys. It doesn't belong there but
neither does it belong in the genus Lyropecten. There is only one living
Lyropecten and that is magnificus from the Galapagos.
  It is very confusing right now, I expect it will be cleared up soon.
       Carole Marshall

P.S. As per my article in Am Conch. The Florida species is known as
Nodipecten fragosus ( Conrad, 1849) Nodipecten nodosus is restricted to the
southern Caribbean form around Colombia, Honduras etc.