In shell morphology "Epitonium" blainei is identical to Cirsotrema
zelebori. The latter, as stated in my message of 30-7-99, is the
evolutionary end-member of an unbroken fossil lineage (I have numerous
specimens of this lineage at hand). Its oldest-known direct ancestor is C.
lyratum, which spans a timerange from at least the middle Eocene to the
late Miocene. C. lyratum is highly variable, with some specimens closely
resembling the type species of the genus, C. varicosum, with lamellose
costal crests in or nearly in contact with one another and largely hiding
the shell surface underneath. If "E" blainei is indistinguishable from a
member of this lineage, how then can it belong in another genus?

The only way in which "E" greenlandicum differs from Cirsotrema is by the
smooth surface of its costae. However specimens of C. zelebori from the
southern end of its range in New Zealand also have smooth costae. The
spiral sculpture is similar in all of the abovementioned species, as well
as other species from the Atlantic, Japan and elsewhere, from the late
Cretaceous to Recent. Costae of Cirsotrema may be fused solid or loosely
lamellose, and this can vary intraspecifically.

"E" greenlandicum, as with most other Cirsotrema, differs from Epitonium in
its spiral sculpture of strong cords overlain by finer lirae, and by a
heavy symmetrical peribasal cord. This type of sculpture is unknown in
Epitonium.

I can see no reason not to consider Boreoscala an outright synonym of
Cirsotrema. Merely because Boreoscala has traditionally been considered a
subgenus of Epitonium does not mean it is cast in stone.

Now to throw a real can of worms into the ring (throw your arms up in
horror! Who is this character Grebneff?) When you look at the whole
morphological range of Cirsotrema, Amaea, Boreoscala and all of the
subgenera of Epitonium, it is impossible to sort them neatly into
consistent groupings. They all overlap, sometimes more than two "genera" at
a time. Where does Epitonium end and Parviscala (=Asperiscala) begin? Where
does Parviscala end and Amaea begin (and is Filiscala is a Parviscala or an
Amaea without a peribasal cord)? Where does Amaea end and Cirsotrema begin?
The answer is that they don't "end", they all blend into one another. And
the "line" they form bends back and touches itself at some points ie it
forms a sort of irregular net rather than a line. What is Gyroscala? Is it
an Epitonium with a peribasal cord? How can Gyroscala be used, when
presence of the cord is inconsistent within a species? Sure, there are
species "typical" of these so-called genera/subgenera, but as a whole the
thing just doesn't work. I think when eventually (hint, hint) cladistic and
DNA work etc is done, there will be big changes. My feeling is that this
whole grouping will eventually be shown to be congeneric. And such
subgenera as Nitidiscala, Hialoscala, Hirtoscala, Mazescala etc have no
basis in reality. I leave all this with individual Ep nuts to think about.

It is important to be as objective as possible in taxonomy. Just because an
author says "IT IS SO" does not necessarily mean that it is so, and a new
revision is not automatically accurate. When we really WANT something to be
THIS way we are quite capable of throwing objectivity away in order to
force the evidence to fit our preferences. This is particularly the case
with a large and difficult group of relatively featureless shells such as
Epitoniinae (though far more so with such as Eulimidae. Look what Anders
Waren has managed to do with that family. Perhaps we need him to examine
the Epitoniidae). But we must always remember that any taxonomic decision,
by anyone, is always an OPINION. (This is not an attack on anyone, please
note. It is merely my own personal opinion).

Regards
Andrew Grebneff