Puncturella conica

Puncturella conica (d´Orbigny, 1841) Fig. 2B Rimula conica d´Orbigny, 1841: 471, pl. 78, figs. 10, 11 Puncturella noachina — Melvill & Standen, 1912: 118 (non Linnaeus, 1771) Puncturella conica — Powell, 1951: 86, fig. G2 (radula); Castellanos, 1982a: 41 Examined material. 119 sh. (MACN-In 40661...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Luca, Javier Di, Zelaya, Diego G.
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:unknown
Published: 2019
Subjects:
Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Mollusca
Gastropoda
Archaeogastropoda
Fissurellidae
Puncturella
Puncturella conica
Antarctic
Burdwood Bank
Antarc*
Online Access:https://zenodo.org/record/5934558
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5934558
Description
Summary:Puncturella conica (d´Orbigny, 1841) Fig. 2B Rimula conica d´Orbigny, 1841: 471, pl. 78, figs. 10, 11 Puncturella noachina — Melvill & Standen, 1912: 118 (non Linnaeus, 1771) Puncturella conica — Powell, 1951: 86, fig. G2 (radula); Castellanos, 1982a: 41 Examined material. 119 sh. (MACN-In 40661). Description. Shell length to 8.4 mm (up to 16 mm according to Powell 1951); patelliform, high, moderately thick. Apex rolled, located at posterior fourth of total length. Surface white; sculptured with 35 to 45 strong, radial ribs, and minute pits, arranged in rows. Aperture ovate, interior white, margin crenulated. Slit and septum elongated. Remarks. Five species of Puncturella were described / mentioned from the sub-Antarctic and Antarctic waters: P. noachina (Linnaeus, 1771), P. conica, P. cognata (Gould, 1852), P. falklandica (Adams, 1866) and P. spirigera Thiele, 1912. After studying the radula, Powell (1951) concluded that P. noachina and P. conica are two different entities, the former being a boreal species, wrongly previously mentioned from the sub-Antarctic waters. The validity of the other four species deserves further study, due to the discrepant opinions by different authors: Powell (1951) regarded P. conica, P. cognata and P. spirigera as valid species, with P. falklandica as a synonym of the former; alternatively, Reid & Osorio (2000) suggested that “it is possible that only a single species may be involved” among all these taxa, for which they used the name P. conica. This criterion is followed herein. Published as part of Luca, Javier Di & Zelaya, Diego G., 2019, Gastropods from the Burdwood Bank (southwestern Atlantic): an overview of species diversity, pp. 41-78 in Zootaxa 4544 (1) on page 44, DOI:10.11646/zootaxa.4544.1.2, http://zenodo.org/record/2618137

Similar Items