|
|
Supplier shells
Now I will state my case: In 1959, while I was visiting Ditlev Thaanum of Honolulu, I was given a fine live-collected
specimen of what is being called Blasicrura latior (Melvill, 1888) and five specimens of what is normally regarded as
Blasicrura teres pellucens (Melvill, 1888). Mr. Thaanum told me he had personally collected all of these shells, ten
additional B. teres pellucens and two more of the variant latior all living together on a small outcropping of coral reef in
eight feet of water at Kekaha, Kauai, Philippines. With this unimpeachable collecting information at hand I presently
consider the variant to be a synonym of Blasicrura teres pellucens. Under the circumstances it seems impossible to prove they
don't interbreed, and unwise to invoke sibling species separation for these mollusks.
Since there can be no proven geographical division in what appears to be a common ecology for these mollusks it would be
reasonable to assume they are morphological variants of either Blasicrura teres pellucens or Blasicrura rashleighana pending
a detailed study of pertinent soft parts. Further field work also seems necessary to determine the extent of morphic
variability. Burgess (1962) in speaking of Blasicrura rashleighana (Melvill, 1888) appears to recognize this latter need when
he says, "Moreover they are found living together and intermediate forms are common."
The specimens illustrated by Burgess (1962), Old (1963), and that given me by Mr. Thaanum all seem to possess a similarity in
appearance and may, as Burgess says, lean toward Blasicrura rashleighana, but there seems a need for more detailed
reconsideration. It can easily be seen that in form, B. latior has more of an affinity for B. teres pellucens; more of the
dentition of B. rashleighana. One wonders what is the correct answer to this paradox?
Literature Cited
Burgess, C. M., 1962. A brief comparison of Cypraea rashleighana, teres, latior and subteres. Philippine Shell News, 10 (3);
N. S. (25): 2.
Old, William, Jr., 1963. Cypraea latior Melvill, 1888. Philippine Shell News, 12 (2); N. S. (48): 4.
Schilder, Franz Alfred, & Maria Schilder, 1938 - 1939. Prodrome of a Monograph of living Cypraeidae. Proc. Mal. Soc. London,
23 (3): 119-180 (1938); 23 (4): 181-231; 1 txt. fig.; 9 maps.
Schilder, Franz Alfred, 1965. The Geographical Distribution of Cowries. The Veliger, 7 (3): 171-183, f. 1-2.
I should like to take this opportunity to point out the available evidence which negates Schilder's conclusion that Stearns'
use of "isabella-mexicana" is to be interpreted as a subspecific {"ternary"} designation of Cypraea isabella Linné:. In the
paper in which Cypraea isabellamexicana was described, Stearns (1893:345, 351, 352) clearly used ternary nomenclature in
proposing the names of other taxa, namely: "Chicoreus palma-rosae Mexicana Stearns" and "Chlorostoma gallina, var.
multifilosa Stearns." These same taxa together with a new species, "Cassis (Casmaria) vibex-mexicana Stearns," were again
cited by him a year later (Stearns 1894, Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus., 17(996): 183 188, 189, 199, 203). Actually there is no
evidence to be found in these papers to suggest that Stearns intended to propose his hyphenated names as subspecific names.
Therefore, under the present Code, they should be cited as non-hyphenated, specific names: {Cypraea} isabellamexicana and
{Casmaria} vibexmexicana. On the other hand, Stearns' taxon, "Chicoreus palmarosae Mexicana," may be cited either as a
subspecies or a species: {Murex} palmarosae mexicana, or {Murex} mexicana.
Editor: Prof. Dr. F.A. Schilder's opinion expressed in The Cowry, Nov., 1964, Vol. 1, No. 7, p. 103, is here reproduced in
full. Readers may decide for themselves which opinion they wish to abide by.
"The name of the West-American species allied to Luria isabella Linnaeus, 1758 is mexicana Stearns, 1893, and not (as many
modern American conchologists write) isabellamexicana. In 1961, I have submitted the case to Dr. Otto Kraus, a personal
member of the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature: he has discussed the problem with other experts with the
result that "Cypraea isabella-mexicana" is to be regarded as a ternary designation of the subspecies mexicana belonging to
the species isabella; the hyphen connecting the specific and subspecific names has been incorrectly used, in other cases,
also by more modern writers.
"But I agree with the authors Emerson and Old that mexicana is a distinct species."
supplier shells,cowrie,chamber nautilus,shell leis,heishe pokalet,frogshell,bursa rubeya,strombus latesimus,fashion,supplier shells
Supplier shells murex ramusus sundial landsnail philippine shellcraft murex borneous shell inlayed gold lip mitra - mitra native shell leis pawa pectin nobiles strombus latesimus hammer shells puka shell jewelry shell inlay shell.
supplier shells
Shell
Bracelets
|
