(plain text - no italic or bold possible)

Hello everybody!

Sorry about another question but if someone know I thanks the knowleged
share.

a. Thesaurus Conchyliorum - Marginella :374 nº 2
Marginella harpaeformis ..., Beck. M.S.
b. Redfield 1870
Marginella harpaeformis Beck (ined.), Sowerby Thes. Conch. :374 1846
c. Dautzenberg 1891
Marginella harpaeformis Beck in Sowerby, 1846. Thes. Conch. :374
d. Tomlin 1917
Marginella harpaeformis,Sowerby, ex Beck MS 1846. Thes. Conch. :374

I´ve a lote of doubts:

1. it seems that Sowerby II described previously (1846) some species in
Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. and state in Thesaurus (1847) as NOBIS vide
Marginella albocincta pag. 382

2. Why Thesaurus is referenced with data 1846? Correct date to
Monographs of Marginellidae isn't 1847 ?

3. Seems to me harpeaformis is a manuscript name original state by Beck.
In this case is corrected as (de Beck MS) Sowerby II? [something like a
post mortem(?!) description)

4. Dautzenberg state as IN (different as MS) and Tomlin as EX.

5. General accept as describe in Thesaurus and IF 1847 corrected date to
Monographs of this genera, data is wrong.

What could be the correct reference?
Glabella harpaeformis (de Beck MS)(Sowerby II, 1847)?
Glabella harpaeformis (Sowerby II, 1847)?
Glabella harpaeformis (Sowerby II, 1846)?

Thank you
Luis

http://marginellidae.no.sapo.pt
(lag lag lag lag last days)