Dear Sim
Amphidromus perversus does not occur in Phuket, but there are certainly
other Amphidromus in Thailand - most of which are not easy to get.
A. perversus is only Bali, and while I have seen a number of Philippine and
Papua New Guinean snails passed off as being from Thailand I have not had
this from Indonesia.
Unfortunately I cannot give more detail on the other Amphidromus species
until I find some missing papers
Regards
Geoff
>From: "MR.SIM (SWEE FHAI)" <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Shells ID
>Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 02:05:35 +0800
>
>Dear Conch-Lers,
>I think the Lima is surely Lima tetrica. I received 4 specimen and they are
>small compared to Lima Lima from my area. I was told that these little
>white Lima tetrica are from deep water and they were trawled by shrimpers
>in Baja California. Am I right ?
>
>As for the land snails, I got them from a Thai dealer, he said they are
>from Thailand which I felt very suspicious. I want more info. May be Geoff
>is correct, some could be from Philippines. Do you find Amp. Perversus in
>Phuket ? I purchased some left and right handed ones there.
>
>The Trochid/Calliostoma could be from Florida. Gary L. Heit saw the
>trochid/Calliostoma and he mentioned that there is one that look like it
>from Florida.
>
>A thousand thanks for the information.
>
>SIM of Borneo.
>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Harry G. Lee
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 3:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Shells ID
>
>
> Paul, Sim, et al.,
>
> Based on shell morphology including rib count, Sim's Lima is almost
>certainly L. tetrica Gould, 1851 (type locality "Gulf of California at La
>Paz [Baja California Sur, Pacific], Mexico" fide Johnson, 1974) - and not
>its Caribbean cognate. This analysis indicates a Panamic Province origin
>for his specimen.
>
> P. M. Mikkelsen and Bieler (1998) indicated, as had a few previous
>authors, not only that these two (Caribbean and Panamic) Lima lima
>relatives differ at the specific level, but also that Lima lima (Linnaeus,
>1758), L. caribaea d'Orbigny, 1842, and L. sowerbyi Deshayes, 1863 (from
>the eastern Atlantic, Caribbean, and Indo-west Pacific respectively) could
>also be distinguished as separate taxa.
>
> Since Sim is situated in the latter province, he may be interested to
>know that his Lima lima relative probably cannot be called L. sowerbyi
>Deshayes, 1863 legitimately because that name was applied (earlier) to a
>different species by Geinitz (1850) - a fact apparently overlooked by the
>M. and B. Besides pointing out this homonymy, Cernohorsky (1972) argued in
>favor of the name L. vulgaris (Link, 1807) for the Indo-west Pacific taxon
>citing the type locality of "Tranquebar [and the Red Sea]" (vs. any of the
>other faunal zones we've considered) applied by Chemnitz (1784) to the
>figure Link cited (as his type specimen).
>
> I'm not sure this (and other type illustrations) are convincing enough
>to safely proceed with the four species paradigm, but on review of the
>shells in my collection, I believe there is merit in that phylogeny. It
>would be nice, however, if a worker would indicate the type material in a
>less ambiguous way than we currently have available. The provision of
>lecto-, neo-, other types would likely needed for proper resolution.
>
> If this isn't confusing enough, you'll certainly want to also read Dodge
>(1952; pp. 186-187). It makes me glad I don't do this stuff for a living.
>
> Harry
>
> Literature consulted:
> Cernohorsky, W. O., 1972. Marine shells of the Pacific volume II.
>Pacific Publications, Sydney. pp. 1-411 incl. 68 pls.
> Dodge, H., 1952. A historical review of the mollusks of Linnaeus. Part
>I. The classes Loricata and Pelecypoda. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 100(1):
>1-263.
> Johnson, R. I., 1974. The Recent Mollusca of Augustus Addison Gould. U.
>S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 239: 1-182 + pls. 1-45.
> Mikkelsen P. M. and R. Bieler, 1998. File clams and flame scallops in
>the western Atlantic (Bivalvia: Limidae). Abstracts of the World Congress
>of Malacology, Washington, DC 25-30 July 1998. Chicago, 1998.
>
> Harry
>
>
> At 11:15 AM 1/27/01 -0500, you wrote:
> >Hello Mr. Sim,
> >
> >In Picture #1, shell #1 is a Lima (family Limidae). You didn't say
> >which coast of Mexico it is from. If it is from the Caribbean side, it
> >is probably Lima lima (L.). If it is from the Pacific coast, it could
> >be Lima tetrica Gould.
> >
> >Shell #2 is a "Calliostoma type" shell, not an actual Trochus, and
> >certainly not a Bolma. It may be an Astele, possibly Astele bularra
> >Garrard, but probably something else in that general category.
> >
> >Shell #3 appears to be Cuma lacera (Born). The detachment of the last
> >whorl from the previous whorls is not a normal characteristic of the
> >species, just a fluke of your specimen.
> >
> >Picture #2 - shows some of those terrestrial-type thingies. I'll pass.
> >
> >Picture #3 - Shell #P1 appears to be Chlamys macassarensis (Chenu). It
> >could be Chlamys reevei (Adams & Reeve), which some authors consider to
> >be a form of C. macassarensis.
> >
> >Shells #P2 and P3 both show markings and rib counts typical of Chlamys
> >tranquebaricus (Gmelin), but in the picture they (especially P3) appear
> >too inflated to be that species. It's hard to tell. The pictures are
> >not clear enough.
> >
> >Shell #P4 appears to be Pecten (Gloripallium) pallium (L.), but from
>the
> >picture provided, I can't completely rule out Gloripallium speciosum
>(Reeve)
> >
> >Regards,
> >Paul M.
>
>
> **********************************************************
> Harry G. Lee
> Suite 500
> 1801 Barrs St.
> Jacksonville, FL 32204
> USA 904-384-6419
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Visit the Jacksonville Shell Club Home Page at:
> http://home.sprynet.com/~wfrank/jacksonv.htm
>
>
> oo .--. oo .--. oo .--.
> \\(____)_ \\(____)_ \\(____)_
> `~~~~~~~` `~~~~~~~` `~~~~~~~`
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
|
