DNA sequencing is often spoken of as though it is the "final solution" to questions of taxonomic placement. I can see that such studies might reveal high-level relationships (or lack thereof) that might not be expressed in morphology. For example, it might reveal that a shell currently classified as a volute, because it looks like one, is actually a Marginella. However, when you get down to decisions at the species or even subspecies level, how is DNA analysis any more objective than morphologic analysis? Once you know the degree of difference between the DNA of two similar forms, doesn't someone have to make a subjective decision as to whether that degree of difference warrants specific separation or not? And aren't we necessarily going to end up with a camp of taxonomic DNA lumpers and a camp of taxonomic DNA splitters, just as we have traditionally had with morphological studies? Paul M.