Hi Emilio,
 
On Conus martensi check out La Conchiglia, N.216-217, March-April 1987,
pp. 24-25 for an article by Moolenbeek & Coomans titled "The Rediscovery
of Conus martensi Smith, 1884".  This article sums up the position that
the population of cones in Natal are C. martensi.  They illustrate the
holotype of C. martensi (Note shell appears colored yellow in the
photograph). The name C. alconnelli is not mentioned, but the authors
illustrate two shells from Natal that DaMotta would identify as C.
alconnelli.
 
DaMotta presents his position in World Shells, N. 19, December 1996 in an
article on pp. 8-16.  He discusses several cone names in the article, so
it is easy to miss the part about C. martensi/C. alconnelli which starts
on page 10.  DaMotta also illustrates the holotype and presents a photo
about four times the size of the shell.  In this photo, the color of the
shell appears orange.
 
In another World Shells article, DaMotta states that no less than 46 of
his named species are listed as synonyms in the Manual of Living Conidae.
 A short stick, indeed.  I also note that in the litterature cited
section of the Manual, there is not a single one of Bob DaMottas
published papers listed.
 
But back to shells... differences cited by DaMotta between C. martensi
and C. alconnelli are:
1) its [C. martensi] small size [24mm holotype] (and we have no means to
determine from the one specimen whether it is a juvenile or fully adult
shell); 2) its coloration is indubitably orange (never seen in
alconnelli); it has a pronouced sclariform spire whereas that of
alconnelli is barely perceptible; 4) its sides are somewhat convex; and
5) its habitat in the reefs of the Mascarenes is, geographically
separated from the coast of Durban, South Africa where alconnelli has
been dredged in 55 up to 78 fathoms.
 
The La Conchiglia articla has a beautiful black and white S.E.M. photo of
the spire sculpture of a 14mm juvenile of the South African population.
It is a pity that they didn't get the same angle on the holotype of C.
martensi.
 
On your other subject, I can't help.  I have seen subspecies referred to
as both populations of "equal" rank and an inferior/superior sort of
relationship.  I just try to put what seems to me to be the best name on
my population samples using species and form designations.  In the past
ten years, only two other collectors have looked at my shells.  As long
as I keep the locality data right, I'll be able to work on the names when
I can retire from the rat race and "play" with my shells full time.
 
Bill Fenzan
Norfolk, VA
 
[log in to unmask]