Abstract Abstract
The type status is described for 65 taxa of the Orthalicoidea, classified within the families Megaspiridae (14), Orthalicidae (30), and Simpulopsidae (20); one taxon is considered a nomen inquirendum. Lectotypes are designated for the following taxa: Helix brephoides d’Orbigny, 1835; Simpulopsis cumingi Pfeiffer, 1861; Bulimulus (Protoglyptus) dejectus Fulton, 1907; Bulimus iris Pfeiffer, 1853. The type status of Bulimus salteri Sowerby III, 1890, and Strophocheilus (Eurytus) subirroratus da Costa, 1898 is now changed to lectotype according Art. 74.6 ICZN. The taxa Bulimus loxostomus Pfeiffer, 1853, Bulimus marmatensis Pfeiffer, 1855, Bulimus meobambensis Pfeiffer, 1855, and Orthalicus powissianus var. niveus Preston 1909 are now figured for the first time. The following taxa are now considered junior subjective synonyms: Bulimus marmatensis Pfeiffer, 1855 = Helix (Cochlogena) citrinovitrea Moricand, 1836; Vermiculatus Breure, 1978 = Bocourtia Rochebrune, 1882. New combinations are: Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) Rochebrune, 1882; Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) aequatoria (Pfeiffer, 1853); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) anthisanensis (Pfeiffer, 1853); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) aquila (Reeve, 1848); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) badia (Sowerby I, 1835); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) bicolor (Sowerby I, 1835); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) caliginosa (Reeve, 1849); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) coagulata (Reeve, 1849); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) cotopaxiensis (Pfeiffer, 1853); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) filaris (Pfeiffer, 1853); Kara indentata (da Costa, 1901); Clathrorthalicus magnificus (Pfeiffer, 1848); Simpulopsis (Eudioptus) marmartensis (Pfeiffer, 1855); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) nucina (Reeve, 1850); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) ochracea (Morelet, 1863); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) peaki (Breure, 1978); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) petiti (Pfeiffer, 1846); Clathrorthalicus phoebus (Pfeiffer, 1863); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) polymorpha (d’Orbigny, 1835); Scholvienia porphyria (Pfeiffer, 1847); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) purpurata (Reeve, 1849); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) quechuarum Crawford, 1939; Quechua salteri (Sowerby III, 1890); Kuschelenia (Bocourtia) subfasciata Pfeiffer, 1853; Clathrorthalicus victor (Pfeiffer, 1854). In an addedum a lectotype is being designated for Bulimulus (Drymaeus) interruptus var. pallidus Preston, 1909. An index is included to all taxa mentioned in this paper and the preceding ones in this series (Breure and Ablett 2011, 2012, 2014).
Keywords: Megaspiridae, Orthalicidae, Simpulopsidae, types
Introduction
This is the fourth paper on the types of Orthalicoidea in the Natural History Museum, London. Earlier papers (Breure and Ablett 2011, 2012, 2014) have presented the context of the collection, the criteria used for the selection of lectotypes, some biohistorical notes, and a list of type specimens belonging to the Amphibulimidae, Bothriembryontidae, Bulimulidae, and Odontostomidae. The aim of this paper is to provide data on the type specimens classified within the Megaspiridae, Orthalicidae, and Simpulopsidae (sensu Breure and Romero 2012). The paper is concluded with an addenda and corrigenda to the whole series of papers, including a list of taxa of which no type material could be found; in the Appendix, an index to all taxa treated in the four papers is given.
References are given to the original publication, plus those of following papers where type material has been mentioned or is (re-)figured. Dates of publication are in accordance with Coan et al. (2013a, 2013b) and Duncan (1937). Abbreviations used for depositories of material are: ANSP, Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, U.S.A.; MHNG, Muséum d’Histoire naturelle, Genève, Switzerland; MNHN, Muséum nationale d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, France; MZSP, Museu de Zoología, São Paulo, Brazil; NHMUK, Natural History Museum, London, U.K.; RBINS, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels, Belgium. Other abbreviations used are: / end of line in cited text; coll., collection; D, diameter; H, shell height; ICZN, the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature; leg., legit, collected by; W, number of whorls; +, used for specimens with a broken apex. See Breure and Whisson (2012: fig. 1) for the way measurements on the shell have been taken. Label styles in the Cuming collection (“M.C. label style”) are explained in Breure and Ablett (2011: 7–8). Although most figures have been composed with the shells enlarged, their relative size is approximately maintained; the actual shell height is given in the figures legends.
Systematics
Systematic list of taxa arranged in generic order
This systematic list follows Breure (1979) as far as appropriate. The generic classification has been adapted from Breure (1979), Breure and Schouten (1985), and unpublished data from the senior author; the family classification is amended as proposed by Breure and Romero (2012). It may be noted that ongoing phylogenetic research may alter the classification. Within the family, genus and species level taxa are presented in alphabetical order.
Family Megaspiridae Pilsbry, 1904
Megaspira
Jay, 1836
elata Gould, 1847.
Thaumastus
Albers, 1860
achilles Pfeiffer, 1853; ascendens Pfeiffer, 1853; buckleyi Higgins, 1872; consimilis Reeve, 1848; foveolatus Reeve, 1849; hartwegi Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846; inca d’Orbigny, 1835; insolitus Preston, 1909; integer Pfeiffer, 1855; loxostomus Pfeiffer 1853; magnificus Grateloup, 1839; plumbeus Pfeiffer, 1855; requieni Pfeiffer, 1853.
Remarks.
Molecular studies (Breure and Romero 2012, Breure unpublished data) strongly suggest that this genus, treated with several subgenera by Breure (1979), is polyphyletic and only the nominate taxon is grouping with Megaspira. However, further studies are needed as taxon sampling has been relatively low until now.
Family Orthalicidae Martens in Albers, 1860
Clathrorthalicus
Strebel, 1909
magnifica Pfeiffer, 1848; phoebus Pfeiffer, 1863; victor Pfeiffer, 1854.
Corona
Albers, 1850
gracilis E.A. Smith, 1902.
Kara
Strebel, 1910
indentatus da Costa, 1901; thompsonii Pfeiffer, 1845; yanamensis Morelet, 1863.
Liguus
Montfort, 1810
murrea Reeve, 1849.
Orthalicus
Beck, 1837
bensoni Reeve, 1849; bifulguratus Reeve, 1849; boucardi Pfeiffer, 1860; mars Pfeiffer, 1861; phlogera d’Orbigny, 1835.
Porphyrobaphe (Oxyorthalicus)
Strebel, 1909
subirroratus da Costa, 1898.
Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe)
Shuttleworth, 1856
approximata Fulton, 1896; iris Pfeiffer, 1853; irroratus Reeve, 1849; saturanus Pfeiffer, 1860.
Quechua
Strebel, 1910
salteri Sowerby III, 1890.
Remarks.
Both this taxon described by Strebel and the next one (Scholvienia Strebel, 1910), previously treated as subgenera of Thaumastus (Breure 1979, Schileyko 1999), are now elevated to generic rank as several species appear as distinct groups in molecular studies (Breure unpublished data). This genus is only provisionally ranked with this family, and further molecular research with increased taxon sampling is needed to give better insight into the systematic position of this group.
Scholvienia
Strebel, 1910
alutaceus Reeve, 1849; brephoides d’Orbigny, 1835; porphyrius Pfeiffer, 1847.
Sultana (Metorthalicus)
Pilsbry, 1899
deburghiae Reeve, 1859; fraseri Pfeiffer, 1858; gloriosus Pfeiffer, 1862; kelletti Reeve, 1850; niveus Preston, 1909; vicaria Fulton, 1896; yatesi Pfeiffer, 1855.
Sultana (Sultana)
Shuttleworth, 1856
meobambensis Pfeiffer, 1855.
Family Simpulopsidae Schileyko, 1999
Leiostracus
Albers, 1850
clouei Pfeiffer, 1857; demerarensis Pfeiffer, 1861; jeffreysi Pfeiffer, 1852; obliquus Reeve, 1849; opalinus Sowerby I, 1833; sarcochilus Pfeiffer, 1857; subtuszonata Pilsbry, 1899.
Rhinus
Albers, 1860
hyaloideus Pfeiffer, 1855; ovulum Reeve, 1849.
Simpulopsis (Eudioptus)
Albers, 1860
ephippium Ancey, 1904; marmatensis Pfeiffer, 1855.
Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis)
Beck, 1837
aenea Pfeiffer, 1861; corrugatus Guppy, 1866; cumingi Pfeiffer 1861; decussata Pfeiffer, 1857; gomesae da Silva & Thomé, 2006; miersi Pfeiffer, 1857; salomonia Pfeiffer, 1953; simulus Morelet, 1851; vincentina E.A. Smith, 1895.
Nomen inquirendum
dejectus Fulton, 1907.
Alphabetic list of taxa by species name
Bulimus achilles
Pfeiffer, 1853
Figure 1.
Thaumastus species. i–ii Thaumastus taunaisii (Férussac, 1822), lectotype of Bulimus achilles Pfeiffer, 1853 NHMUK 1975268 (H = 58.0) iii–iv Thaumastus largillierti (Philippi, 1842), holotype Bulimus consimilis Reeve, 1848 NHMUK 20030189 (H = 52.9) v–vi Thaumastus foveolatus (Reeve, 1849), lectotype NHMUK 1975275 (H = 71.5).
Figure L1.
i Bulimus achilles Pfeiffer, 1853 ii Simpulopsis aenea Pfeiffer, 1861 iii Bulimus alutaceus Reeve, 1849 iv Porphyrobaphe approximata Fulton, 1896.
Bulimus achilles Pfeiffer 1853b: 378; Pfeiffer 1854b: 137; Pfeiffer 1855 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 247, pl. 66 fig. 9; Breure 1979: 44.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) taunaisii achilles ; Breure 1978: 32 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
[Brazil] “in ripis fluvii Amazonum”.
Label.
“Banks of Amazon”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 57, diam. 25 mill.”. Figured specimen H 58.0, D 25.5, W 6.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975268, lectotype, 1975269, 2 paralectotypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but the species was described from the Cuming collection. The original label also mentions “between B. Largilliertii / + taunasii”; a label in a second (later?) hand has added “Prov. S. Paulo, Brazil / (Nehring)”.The current systematic position is according to Richardson (1995: 384).
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus taunaisii (Férussac, 1822).
Simpulopsis aenea
Pfeiffer, 1861
Figure 27.
Simpulopsis species. i–iii Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) aenea Pfeiffer, 1861, syntype NHMUK 1975229 (H = 8.98) iv–vi Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) miersi Pfeiffer, 1857, lectotype NHMUK 1975489 (H = 20.6).
Simpulopsis aenea Pfeiffer 1861a [April]: 84; Pfeiffer 1861b [May]: 27; Reeve 1862 [1860–1862]: pl. 1 fig. 7; Pfeiffer 1868a: 22; Breure 1979: 134.
Type locality.
“Parada, reipublicae mexicanae (Sallé)”.
Label.
“Parada, Mexico, Mr Sallé”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Diam. maj. 9, min. 8, alt. 5 1/2 mill.”. Figured specimen H 8.98, D 10.6, W 2.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 20140830, three syntypes, Sallé leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The current systematic position follows Thompson (2011: 130). The reference to this species in Richardson (1995: 361) cites the wrong author; the first two citations in his list should be omitted.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) aenea Pfeiffer, 1861.
Bulimus alutaceus
Reeve, 1849
Figure 10.
Scholvienia species. i–iv Scholvienia alutaceus (Reeve, 1849), lectotype NHMUK 1975148 (H = 35.5) v–vii Scholvienia brephoides (d’Orbigny, 1835), lectotype NHMUK 1854.12.4.117 (H = 51.9).
Bulimus alutaceus Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 72 fig. 522; Reeve 1850b: 99; Pfeiffer 1853b: 324; Breure 1979: 40 [cited with the wrong year].
Strophocheilus alutaceus ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 59, pl. 23 fig. 61.
Thaumastus (Scholvienia) alutaceus ; Breure 1978: 40, fig. 47 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“Cuzco, Bolivia; W. Lobb”.
Label.
“Cuzco”. M.C. label style III, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 35.5, D 16.5, W 6.6.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975148, lectotype, 1975149, one paralectotype. W. Lobb leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based. As Weyrauch (1964: 46) has argued, the type locality is probably in error. The current systematic position follows Richardson (1995: 371) at the species level. The familiar arrangement cannot be ascertained at present; tentatively this taxon is classified with the Orthalicidae until further research has proven its relationships.
Current systematic position.
?Orthalicidae, Scholvienia alutacea (Reeve, 1849).
Porphyrobaphe approximata
Fulton, 1896
Figure 14.
Porphyrobaphe species. i–ii Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe) approximata Fulton, 1896, syntype NHMUK 1895.12.19.44 (H = 65.7) iii–v Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe) iris (Pfeiffer, 1853), lectotype NHMUK 20100506 (H = 72.6).
Porphyrobaphe approximata Fulton 1896: 103; Fulton 1897: pl. 6 fig. 6; Pilsbry 1899: 208, pl. 40 fig. 1; Linares and Vera 2012: 156 [incorrect original name].
Type locality.
[Colombia] “Bogota”.
Label.
“Bogota”, in Fulton’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Long. 67 millim., maj. diam. 31 millim.”. Figured specimen H 65.7, D 32.5, W 6.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 1895.12.19.44, one syntype (ex Fulton).
Remarks.
Fulton did not state on how many specimens his description was based; the single specimen found corresponds to his figure and is herein considered as syntype. The current systematic position is according to Richardson (1993: 117).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe) approximata Fulton, 1896.
Bulimus ascendens
Pfeiffer, 1853
Figure 2.
i–iv Megaspira elata (Gould, 1847), paratype NHMUK 1987060 (H = 37.2). Thaumastus species. v–vi Thaumastus ascendens (Pfeiffer, 1853), lectotype NHMUK 1975274 (H = 92.0).
Figure L2.
i Bulimus ascendens Pfeiffer, 1853 ii Bulimus bensoni Reeve, 1849 iii Bulimus bifulguratus Reeve, 1849.
Bulimus ascendens Pfeiffer 1853b: 378; Pfeiffer 1854b: 136; Pfeiffer 1855 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 247, pl. 66 fig. 7; Breure 1979: 44.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) ascendens ; Breure 1978: 26 (lectotype designation).
Thaumastus ascendens ; Simone 2006: 152, fig. 515.
Type locality.
“Brasilia”.
Label.
“Brazils”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 95 mill., diam. 34 mill.”. Figured specimen H 92.0, D 39.0, W –.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975274, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but the species was described from the Cuming collection. The top whorls of the specimen are missing. The current systematic position is according to Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus ascendens (Pfeiffer, 1853).
Bulimus bensoni
Reeve, 1849
Figure 11.
i–iv Scholvienia porphyrius (Pfeiffer, 1847), lectotype NHMUK 1975277 (H = 51.5) v–vii Orthalicus bensoni (Reeve, 1849), possible syntype NHMUK 1975582 (H = 66.6).
Bulimus bensoni Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 78 fig. 571; Pfeiffer 1853 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 75, pl. 21 fig. 1.
Oxystyla bensoni ; Pilsbry 1899: 147, pl. 31 fig. 64.
Type locality.
“Banks of the river Amazon”.
Label.
“Brazil”. M.C. label style I, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 66.6, D 35.0, W 7.9.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975582, three possible syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve described this taxon from “Mus. Benson”, but did not state on how many specimens his description was based. According to Tillier (1980: 73), the figured specimen is in the collection of the Museum of Zoology, University of Cambridge. The material found is therefore considered as possible syntypes. The specimen figured by Pfeiffer 1853 (in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: pl. 21 fig. 1) was smaller than Reeve’s figure, but also originated from Benson’s collection.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Orthalicus bensoni (Reeve, 1849).
Bulimus bifulguratus
Reeve, 1849
Figure 12.
Orthalicus species. i–ii Orthalicus bifulguratus (Reeve, 1849), lectotype NHMUK 20140082 (H = 56.9) iii–v Orthalicus boucardi (Pfeiffer, 1860), syntype NHMUK 20140081 (H = 54.8).
Bulimus bifulguratus Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 82 fig. 606.
Oxystyla bifulgurata ; Pilsbry 1899: 143, pl. 31 figs 59–60.
Orthalicus bifulguratus ; Breure and Schouten 1985: 29 (lectotype designation); Linares and Vera 2012: 151.
Type locality.
[Colombia] “Andes of Columbia”.
Label.
“Andes of Colombia”. M.C. label style I, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 56.9, D 32.8, W 5.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 20140082, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The lectotype is not full-grown as shown by the lip. Pfeiffer (1853b: 388) mentioned specimens from both “Mus. Cuming, Benson. et Coll. Nr. 260 jun.”; as shell height he gave 65 mm, which was likely measured on a full-grown specimen. Richardson (1993: 98, 110) treated this taxon both as a separate species and as a junior subjective synonym of Bulinus princeps Broderip in Sowerby I 1833; tentatively this taxon is retained as a full species awaiting further studies.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Orthalicus bifulguratus (Reeve, 1849).
Orthalicus boucardi
Pfeiffer, 1860
Figure L3.
i Orthalicus boucardi Pfeiffer, 1860 ii Helix brephoides d’Orbigny, 1835 iii Orthalicus (Porphyrobaphe) buckleyi Higgins, 1872.
Orthalicus boucardi Pfeiffer 1860: 138, pl. 51 fig. 7.
Type locality.
“Mexico (Mr. Boucard)”.
Label.
“Betaza Mexico / Mr. Boucard”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 43, diam. 25–26 mill.”. Figured specimen H 54.8, D 29.7, W 6.9.
Type material.
NHMUK 20140081, three syntypes, Boucard leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The specimens found are larger than the measurements given by Pfeiffer, but undoubtedly were collected by Mr. Boucard, bear Pfeiffer’s handwriting, and are considered syntypes herein. The type locality (Oaxaca, Sierra de Betaza) was specified by Martens 1893 [1890–1901]: 101 on the basis of Boucard’s material. The current systematic position follows Thompson (2011: 101).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Orthalicus boucardi (Pfeiffer, 1860).
Helix brephoides
d’Orbigny, 1835
Helix brephoides d’Orbigny 1835: 17.
Bulimus brephoides ; d’Orbigny 1837 [1834–1847]: 294, pl. 38 figs 8–9 [text 6 May 1838]; Gray 1854: 19.
Strophocheilus brephoides ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 57, pl. 28 figs 4–5.
Type locality.
“republica Peruviana”.
Label.
“Pérou”, in d’Orbigny’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Longit. 52 millim., latit. 25 millim.”. Figured specimen H 51.9, D 25.1, W 5.6.
Type material.
NHMUK 1854.12.4.117, lectotype (d’Orbigny coll.).
Remarks.
d’Orbigny did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The specimen found corresponds to the figures of d’Orbigny and is here designated lectotype (design. n.) to define the taxon, which has been compared to Bulimus taeniolus Nyst, 1845 (Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 57). d’Orbigny (1838 [1834–1847]: 294) specified the type locality as follows: “Nous n’avons pas receuilli nous-même ce Bulime; nous le devons à la bonté toute particulière de M. Mathius, botaniste anglais, que nous avons rencontré à Lima, et qui l’avait apporté du verant oriental des Andes péruviennes, à peu près par la latitude de Lima”; this would indicate the eastern part of Dept. Junín (e.g., Chanchamayo region) as the likely source area. The classification at species level follows Richardson (1995: 373), but further studies are needed to ascertain its status; for the generic level see also the remarks under the systematic arrangement above.
Current systematic position.
?Orthalicidae, Scholvienia brephoides (d’Orbigny, 1835).
Orthalicus (Porphyrobaphe) buckleyi
Higgins, 1872
Figure 3.
Thaumastus species. i–iii Thaumastus hartwegi (Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846), syntype NHMUK 1975126 (H = 57.0) iv–v Thaumastus buckleyi (Higgins, 1872), syntype NHMUK 1872.5.22.6 (H = 92.0).
Orthalicus (Porphyrobaphe) buckleyi Higgins 1872: 685, pl. 56 fig. 3.
Orthalicus (Methorthalicus) buckleyi ; Pilsbry 1899: 193, pl. 41 fig. 6.
Thaumastus (Thamastus) buckleyi ; Breure 1978: 27; Breure 1979: 44; Breure and Borrero 2008: 8.
Type locality.
[Ecuador, Prov. Loja] “San Lucas”.
Label.
“Ecuador”.
Dimensions.
“Long. 93, lat. 36 mill.”. Figured specimen H 92.0, D 36.0, W 6.0.
Type material.
NHMUK 1872.5.22.6, two syntypes (da Costa coll.).
Remarks.
Higgins did not state on how many specimens his description was based. Of the two syntypes mentioned by Breure (1978), only one could be found.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus buckleyi (Higgins, 1872).
Bulimus clouei
Pfeiffer, 1857
Figure 21.
Leiostracus species. i–iii Leiostracus clouei (Pfeiffer, 1857), lectotype NHMUK 1975491 (H = 22.2) iv–v Leiostracus obliquus (Reeve, 1849), syntype of Bulimus jeffreysi Pfeiffer, 1852 NHMUK 20110083 (H = 20.4) vi–viii Leiostracus demerarensis (Pfeiffer, 1861), lectotype NHMUK 1975501 (H = 20.1).
Figure L4.
i Bulimus clouei Pfeiffer, 1857 ii Bulimus consimilis Reeve, 1848.
Bulimus clouei Pfeiffer 1857d: 390; Pfeiffer 1859: 408; Breure 1979: 127.
Drymaeus clouei ; Pilsbry 1899: 94.
Leiostracus (Leiostracus) clouei ; Breure 1978: 227 (lectotype designation).
Leiostracus clouei ; Simone 2006: 121, fig. 377.
Type locality.
“Brazil (Mr. Cloué)”.
Label.
“Brazils Mons Cloué”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 22, diam. 10 mill.”. Figured specimen H 22.2, D 11.1, W 7.2.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975491, lectotype; 1975492, one paralectotype, Cloué leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Leiostracus clouei (Pfeiffer, 1857).
Bulimus consimilis
Reeve, 1848
Bulimus consimilis Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 53 fig. 346.
Type locality.
“—?”.
Label.
“Brazil”. M.C. label style I, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 52.9, D 22.8, W 6.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 20030189, three syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but wrote “[t]his shell approaches nearest to the Bulimus Taunaisii, but is certainly distinct”. Pfeiffer (1853: 406) considered this taxon a junior subjective synonym of Bulimus largillierti Philippi, 1842, which has been followed by later authors. The printed label also mentions this name, and this is consistent with the index (Reeve 1850 [1848–1850]: v); the locality “Brazil” has been added in a later hand.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus largillierti (Philippi, 1842).
Simpulopsis corrugatus
Guppy, 1866
Figure 24.
Simpulopsis species. i–ii Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) corrugata Guppy, 1866, syntype NHMUK 1866.1.3.7 (H = 9.27) iii–vi Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) cumingi Pfeiffer, 1861, lectotype NHMUK 1975486 (H = 14.1).
Figure L5.
i Simpulopsis corrugatus Guppy, 1866 ii Simpulopsis cumingi Pfeiffer, 1861 iii Bulimus deburghiae Reeve, 1859 iv Simpulopsis decussata Pfeiffer, 1857.
Simpulopsis corrugatus Guppy 1866: 53; Breure 1979: 134.
Type locality.
“Trinidad”.
Label.
“Trinidad”, presumably in Guppy’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Height 0.38 inch, greatest breadth 0.47 inch [H 9.65, D 11.9 mm]”. Figured specimen H 9.27 (damaged), D 10.8, W 3.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 1866.1.3.7, one syntype (ex Guppy).
Remarks.
Guppy did not state on how many specimens his description was based; the single specimen found is damaged. Guppy emendated the name “qu’il me paraît préférable de féminiser, à l’exemple de Pfeiffer et de la plupart des auteurs” (Guppy 1878: 323). He also wrote “...je n’avais pu trouver que deux individus complétement adultes et deux exemplaires jeunes de cette espèce (...) Au commencement de l’année 1877, j’ai été assez heureux pour découvrir six à sept autres individus adultes (...) Coll. L. Guppy et H. Crosse”. From this text it is clear that Guppy had multiple specimens at hand when originally describing this taxon, and also that the figure presented in this paper (Guppy 1878: pl. 10 fig. 5) is likely not from the type series.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) corrugata Guppy, 1866.
Simpulopsis cumingi
Pfeiffer, 1861
Simpulopsis cumingi Pfeiffer 1861a [April]: 84; Pfeiffer 1861b [May]: 27, pl. 3 fig. 2; Reeve 1862 [1860–1862]: pl. 1 fig. 5; Pfeiffer 1868a: 22; Pilsbry 1899: 220, pl. 63 figs 61–62; Breure 1979: 134.
Type locality.
“Mexico”.
Label.
“Mexico”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Diam. maj. 20 1/2, alt. 12 mill.”. Figured specimen H 14.1, D 19.0, W 3.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975486, lectotype and one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based. Two specimens have been found in the collection, of which one is designated lectotype (design. n.) to fixate this poorly understood species. This taxon was compared to Simpulopsis aenea by Pilsbry (1899), but has not been recognised by later authors. Richardson’s references (1995: 363) to a citation for Venezuela [Richards and Wagenaar Hummelinck 1940: 7] and Brazil [Jaeckel 1952: 7] were in error; these authors mentioned “Tomigerus cumingi Pfeiffer” [Odontostomidae]. The current systematic position is according to Thompson (2011: 130), who expressed doubt about the locality from which it was reported.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) cumingi Pfeiffer, 1861.
Bulimus deburghiae
Reeve, 1859
Figure 18.
Sultana (Metorthalicus) deburghiae (Reeve, 1859). i–ii Lectotype NHMUK 19601622 (H = 64.7) iii–iv Lectotype of Bulimus gloriosus Pfeiffer, 1862 NHMUK 1975243 (H = 75.2).
Bulimus deburghiae Reeve 1859: 123; Pfeiffer 1868b: 15.
Sultana (Metorthalicus) deburghiae ; Breure and Schouten 1985: 27 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“Peruvian side of the Amazon”.
Label.
“Banks of Amazon River / (Reeve)”, in Dance’s handwriting; see below.
Dimensions.
“Long. 2 3/4 in. Lat. 1 1/4 in. [H 69.9, D 31.8 mm]”. Figured specimen H 64.7, D 33.6, W 6+.
Type material.
NHMUK 19601622, lectotype (ex DeBurgh).
Remarks.
Reeve wrote “[a] fine shell”, but otherwise it is not clear from the context that he had only one specimen at hand. The material is accompanied by a label written in 1961 by S.P. Dance “This specimen does not suit Reeve’s measurements but it is labelled by Mrs. de Burgh”; his selection as lectotype was interpreted as such by Breure and Schouten (1985). Their text may be ambiguous, but as all the qualifying data are given following Recommendation 74C jo. 73C, we feel that this designation qualifies Art. 74.5 ICZN. The specimen is slightly damaged at the top, hence the measurements depart from those given by Reeve.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Metorthalicus) deburghiae (Reeve, 1859).
Simpulopsis decussata
Pfeiffer, 1857
Figure 25.
Simpulopsis species. i–iii Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) gomesae da Silva & Thomé, 2006, paratype (H = 6.46) iv–vii Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) decussata Pfeiffer, 1857, lectotype NHMUK 1975488 (H = 14.3).
Simpulopsis decussata Pfeiffer 1857a: 260; Breure 1978: 232; Breure 1979: 134 (lectotype designation); Simone 2006: 179, fig. 642; da Silva and Thomé 2007: 11, figs 16–17.
Type locality.
[Brazil] “Petropolis prope Rio Janeiro (Miers)”.
Label.
“Petropolis Rio / F. Miers E[sq.]”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Diam. maj. 12 1/2, alt. 11 mill.”. Figured specimen H 14.3, D 12.5, W 4.7.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975488, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described this taxon from “Mus. Cuming”. This is contrasting the statement in da Silva and Thomé (2007), who said “Pfeiffer mentioned a single specimen”; they considered the specimen in NHMUK as the holotype (da Silva and Thomé 2007: 14), but this does not follow Art. 73.1 and Recommendation 73F ICZN Code. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) decussata Pfeiffer, 1857.
Bulimus demerarensis
Pfeiffer, 1861
Figure L6.
i Bulimulus (Protoglyptus) dejectus Fulton, 1907 ii Bulimus demerarensis Pfeiffer, 1861 iii Pupa (Megaspira) elata Gould, 1847 iv Bulimulus ephippium Ancey, 1904.
Bulimus demerarensis Pfeiffer 1861a [April]: 14; Pfeiffer 1861b [May]: 24; Breure 1979: 127.
Drymaeus demerarensis ; Pilsbry 1898 [1897–1898]: 306.
Leiostracus (Leiostracus) demerarensis ; Breure 1978: 227 (lectotype designation).
Bostryx demerarensis ; Muratov and Gargominy 2011: 612, fig. 2B.
Type locality.
[Guiana] “Demerara”.
Label.
“Demerara”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 20 1/2, diam. 10 mill.”. Figured specimen H 20.1, D 10.9, W 6.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975501, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; only a single specimen was found. Muratov and Gargominy (2011) re-described this taxon and studied the anatomy of a single dried individual. They concluded that this taxon “lacks the very characteristic, for Leiostracus, division of the spermathecal duct into an enlarged distal part and a slender proximal part that connect to the distal part sub-apically, which is essentially the only character that separates Leiostracus from Bostryx”. As Breure (1978: 239–240) has shown, these two genera also differ in their radula structure, which was not studied by Muratov and Gargominy. Moreover, molecular data lends support for clear differentiation of both genera, even in different families (Breure and Romero 2012); more research may be needed to ascertain the position of Pfeiffer’s taxon. The generic classification of Breure (1979) is retained herein.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Leiostracus demerarensis (Pfeiffer, 1861).
Pupa (Megaspira) elata
Gould, 1847
Pupa (Megaspira) elata Gould 1847: 197; Gould 1862: 34.
Megaspira elata ; Gould 1852: 91; Gould 1856: 5, pl. 7 fig. 101; Rehder 1945: 67 (lectotype designation); Simone 2006: 182, fig. 659.
Type locality.
“Brazil”.
Label.
“Brazil (Gould)”.
Dimensions.
“Long. 1 1/2, lat. 1/3 poll. [H 38.0, D 8.4 mm]”. Figured specimen H 37.2, D 8.4, W 18.1.
Type material.
NHMUK 1987060, three paralectotypes (ex Gould).
Remarks.
Gould did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The lectotype is USNM 5503 (Rehder 1945), who considered this taxon to be a junior synonym of Pupa elatior Spix, 1827; however, Simone (2006) considered the two taxa as distinct and the current systematic position follows his work.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Megaspira elata (Gould, 1847).
Bulimulus ephippium
Ancey, 1904
Figure 28.
Simpulopsis species. i–iii Simpulopsis (Eudioptus) citrinovitrea (Moricand, 1836), syntype of Bulimus marmatensis Pfeiffer, 1855 NHMUK 1975330 (H = 15.0) iv–vi Simpulopsis (Eudioptus) ephippium Ancey (1904), paralectotype NHMUK 1905.12.30.12 (H = 20.5).
Bulimulus ephippium Ancey 1904: 102; Breure 1979: 62; Simone 2006: 118, fig. 361; Wood and Gallichan 2008: 44; Breure 2011: 25, fig. 16C, 16ii (lectotype designation).
?Bulimulus ephippium ; Breure 1978: 144, pl. 11 fig. 8.
Type locality.
“Bahia, Brazil (teste H. Fulton)”.
Label.
“Bahia”, in Fulton’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Longit. 20, diam. 12 mill.”. Figured specimen H 20.5, D 13.3, W 5.3.
Type material.
NHMUK 1905.12.30.12, one paralectotype.
Remarks.
Ancey did not state on how many specimens his description was based; the NHMUK specimens were considered syntypes by Breure (1978, 1979), and Simone (2006). Breure (2011) selected the specimen in RBINS (also mentioned as syntype by Wood and Gallichan 2008) as lectotype. Ancey (1904) considered his taxon as belonging to “the Eudioptus section” of Bulimulus; Breure (2011) re-classified it with Simpulopsis (Eudioptus) Albers, 1860. Further anatomical and molecular studies should provide more evidence for this classification.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Eudioptus) ephippium Ancey, (1904).
Bulimus foveolatus
Reeve, 1849
Figure L7.
i Bulimus foveolatus Reeve, 1849 ii Corona pfeifferi gracilis E.A. Smith, 1902 iii Bulimus fraseri Pfeiffer, 1858 iv Bulimus gloriosus Pfeiffer, 1862.
Bulimus mahogani Pfeiffer 1841: 42; Pfeiffer 1844 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 40, pl. 13 figs 1–2; Pfeiffer 1848b: 24. Not Bulinus mahogani Sowerby, 1838. See remarks.
Bulimus foveolatus Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 73 fig. 526; Pfeiffer 1853 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: xiv; Breure 1979: 44 (lectotype designation).
Strophocheilus foveolatus ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 46, pl. 24 fig. 71.
Type locality.
“Vitoe, near Sarma [sic, Tarma], Alto-Peru; W. Lobb”.
Label.
“Peru”. M.C. label style IV, V.
Dimensions.
“Long. 3 poll., diam. 15 lin. [H 76.0, D 31.7 mm]”; see remarks. Figured specimen H 71.5, D 37.0, W 5.7.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975275, lectotype; 1975276, one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer, in his original description, referred to Sowerby I 1838 in Sowerby I and II 1832–1841: fig. 59, for which no further data were presented; Pfeiffer (1848b) corrected the dimensions to “Long. 72, diam. 35 mill.”. In both instances the locality was presented as “Chile”, and the material as collected by Philippi (jun.); in Pfeiffer 1844 (Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865) “Aufenthalt: Chile und Peru” is given. The shell figured in the latter publication may be referred to what Reeve (1849) has named as Bulimus foveolatus; Pfeiffer (1853: xiv) remarked that his taxon was not identical to Sowerby’s Bulinus mahogani, however, he did not discuss the large geographical distance between the localities where Philippi and Lobb collected their material. Pfeiffer’s original material is most probably lost (Dance 1966), and whether his taxon is a synonym of Reeve’s may possibly never be fully ascertained. The current systematic position follows Richardson (1995: 375), who incorrectly assigned this taxon to Pfeiffer.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus foveolatus (Reeve, 1849).
Bulimus fraseri
Pfeiffer, 1858
Figure 19.
Sultana species. i–ii Sultana (Metorthalicus) fraseri (Pfeiffer, 1858), lectotype NHMUK 20140083 (H = 88.9) iii–iv Sultana (Metorthalicus) kellettii (Reeve, 1850), lectotype NHMUK 1975241 (H = 61.2).
Bulimus fraseri Pfeiffer 1858: 239; Pfeiffer 1860: 137, pl. 51 fig. 5; Pfeiffer 1860 [1860–1866]: 157, pl. 42 figs 1–2; Pfeiffer 1868: 15.
Orthalicus fraseri ; Pilsbry 1899: 193, pl. 46 figs 31–33.
Sultana (Metorthalicus) fraseri ; Breure and Schouten 1985: 28 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“in provincia Cuenca reipublicae Aequatoris (Fraser)”.
Label.
“Found on the road from Gualaquiza / to Mendez— and near to the latter / place”, “Province of Cuenca / Republic of Ecuador / Mr Fraser”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 89, diam. 37 mill.”. Figured specimen H 88.9, D 45.0, W 6.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 20140083, lectotype, Fraser leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described this taxon from “Mus. Cuming”. The current systematic position follows Breure and Schouten (1985).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Metorthalicus) fraseri (Pfeiffer, 1858).
Bulimus gloriosus
Pfeiffer, 1862
Bulimus gloriosus Pfeiffer 1862: 387, pl. 37 fig. 4; Pfeiffer 1868b: 14.
Sultana (Metorthalicus) deburghiae (Reeve); Breure and Schouten 1985: 27 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“Republic of Ecuador”.
Label.
“Republic Ecuador / Mr Fraser”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 78, diam. 34 mill.”. Figured specimen H 75.2, D 39.3, W 5.7+.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975243, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; the single specimen found has the top damaged. The lectotype designation by Breure and Schouten (1985) may be viewed ambiguously, but as all the qualifying data are given following Recommendation 74C jo. 73C, we feel that this designation qualifies Art. 74.5 ICZN. The current systematic position follows Breure and Schouten (1985).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Metorthalicus) deburghiae (Reeve, 1859).
Simpulopsis gomesae
da Silva & Thomé, 2006
Simpulopsis gomesae da Silva and Thomé 2006: 191, figs 19–32.
Type locality.
“Brasil, Rio Grande do Sul, São Francisco de Paula”.
Label.
No locality.
Dimensions.
Not given (range H 1.60–10.96, D 1.55–8.63 mm). Figured specimen H 6.46, D 6.93, W 3.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 20050238, one paratype in ethanol, J.W. Thomé leg.
Remarks.
This taxon was based on 17 specimens; the specimen present in NHMUK was mentioned in the original paper. Its systematic position may, however, need to be critically re-examined as many taxa have already been described from this region.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) gomesae da Silva & Thomé, 2006.
Corona pfeifferi gracilis
E.A. Smith, 1902
Figure 9.
i–ii Corona pfeifferi gracilis E.A. Smith, 1902, holotype NHMUK 1902.5.27.4 (H = 67.3) iii ?Naesiotus dejectus (Fulton, 1907), lectotype NHMUK 1907.5.3.163 (H = 29.2) iv–vi Liguus murreus (Reeve, 1849), syntype NHMUK 1975482 (H = 38.6).
Corona pfeifferi gracilis E.A. Smith 1902: 170.
Type locality.
“Rio Caqueta, S.E. Colombia”.
Label.
“Rio Caqueta, / S.E. Colombia”, in Smith’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“[L]ength is 67 mm. and diameter 23”. Figured specimen H 67.3, D 24.8, W 8.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 1902.5.27.4, holotype.
Remarks.
This taxon was described from a single specimen. The morphological variation within Corona pfeifferi needs further study.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Corona pfeifferi gracilis E.A. Smith, 1902.
Bulimus hartwegi
Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846
Figure L8.
i Bulimus hartwegi Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846 ii Bulimus hyaloideus Pfeiffer, 1855 iii Helix inca d’Orbigny, 1835.
Bulimus hartwegi Pfeiffer in Philippi 1846 [1845–1847]: 111, pl. 4 fig. 1; Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 29 fig. 176; Pfeiffer 1848b: 140; Breure 1979: 44.
Strophocheilus hartwegi ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 52, pl. 26 fig. 82.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) hartwegi ; Breure 1978: 29; Breure and Borrero 2008: 9.
Type locality.
“respublica [sic] Aequatoris, ubi ad ‘El Catamaija’ prope Loxa Hartweg”.
Label.
“El Catamaja near Loxa”. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long 28, diam. 13´´´ [H 61.0, D 28.3 mm]”. Figured specimen H 57.0, D 30.0, W 4.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975126, one syntype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but said the material was in “Sammlung des Hrn. Hugh Cuming”. Given the context of the publication, it is here assumed that the dimensions were given in German lines (1 line = 2.18 mm); Pfeiffer (1848b) quoted “Long. 57, diam. 26 mill.”, which shell height concurs with our measurement given above. The current systematic position follows Richardson (1995: 376).
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus hartwegi (Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846).
Bulimus hyaloideus
Pfeiffer, 1855
Figure 23.
i–ii Leiostracus subtuszonatus (Pilsbry, 1899), probable paralectotype of Bulimus onager Reeve, 1848 NHMUK 20130094 (H = 29.0) iii–vi Rhinus species. iii–iv Rhinus constrictus (Pfeiffer, 1841), lectotype of Bulimus hyaloideus Pfeiffer, 1855 NHMUK 1975412 (H = 20.6) v–vi Rhinus ovulum (Reeve, 1849), lectotype NHMUK 1975416 (H = 20.1).
Bulimus hyaloideus Pfeiffer 1855b: 292; Pfeiffer 1859: 505; Breure 1979: 131.
Rhinus constrictus (Pfeiffer); Breure 1978: 232 (lectotype designation).
Rhinus hyaloideus ; Linares and Vera 2012: 206.
Type locality.
“Mendez, Andes of New Granada”.
Label.
“Mendes Andes of Granada”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style I.
Dimensions.
“Long. 12 1/2, diam. 7 1/2 mill.”. Figured specimen H 20.6, D 11.1, W 6.7.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975412, lectotype; 1975413, one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; he described this taxon from Cuming’s collection. The paralectotype specimen is juvenile. Breure (1978) mentioned that the original measurements given by Pfeiffer were in error. Linares and Vera (2012) said “Bulimulus hyaloides (Pfeiffer, 1855) es un sinónimo”, overlooking the fact that this is the same taxon; they probably mixed the classification of Richardson (1995: 76) [who placed this taxon with Bulimulus Leach, 1814], and the classification of Breure (1979) [who placed it under Rhinus Albers, 1860]. The current systematic position follows the synonymisation by Breure (1978).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Rhinus constrictus (Pfeiffer, 1841).
Helix inca
d’Orbigny, 1835
Figure 4.
Thaumastus species. i–iii Thaumastus insolitus (Preston, 1909), holotype NHMUK 1947.3.11.1 (H = 70.4) iv–vi Thaumastus inca (d’Orbigny, 1835), lectotype NHMUK 1854.12.4.116 (H = 75.4).
Helix inca d’Orbigny 1835: 16; Breure 1979: 44.
Bulimus inca ; d’Orbigny 1837 [1834–1847]: 294, pl. 38 figs 6–7 [text 6 May 1838]; Gray 1854: 18.
Strophocheilus inca ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 56, pl. 28 figs 10–11.
Thaumastus (Atahualpa) inca ; Breure 1975: 1139.
Type locality.
“Tutulima (republica Boliviana)”.
Label.
“Tutulima, Bolivia”, in d’Orbigny’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Longit 72 millim., latit. 30 millim.”. Figured specimen H 75.4, D 32.3, W 8.3.
Type material.
NHMUK 1854.12.4.116, lectotype and three paralectotypes (d’Orbigny coll.).
Remarks.
d’Orbigny did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The lot found consists of four specimens, of which the one corresponding to d’Orbigny’s figure is now designated lectotype (design. n.) to fixate the taxon, which needs further study to clarify its status; the three paralectotypes are one subadult and two juveniles. Three other specimens are in the MNHN collection (Breure 1975), and are thus paralectotypes. d’Orbigny (1838 [1834–1847]: 295) specified the localities as follows: “deux localités differentes, au nord-est de la Cordillère orientale de Bolivia; la première fois dans le fond d’un ravin humide et boisé, près de Carcuata, province de Yungas, où nous n’en avons eu qu’un seul exemplaire; puis au nord de Cochabamba, dans le fond du ravin de ‘Tutulima’, d’où il nous a été apportes par les Indiens” (see also Breure 1973). The current systematic position follows Richardson (1995: 376).
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus inca (d’Orbigny, 1835).
Strophocheilus (Dryptus) indentatus
da Costa, 1901
Figure 8.
Kara species. i–ii Kara thompsonii (Pfeiffer, 1848), lectotype NHMUK 1975464 (H = 71.0) iii–iv Kara indentatus (da Costa, 1901), lectotype NHMUK 1907.11.21.115 (H = 44.0) v–vi Kara yanamensis (Morelet, 1863), paralectotype NHMUK 1893.2.4.167 (H = 48.6).
Figure L9.
i Strophocheilus (Dryptus) indentatus da Costa, 1901 ii Bulimus (Thaumastus) insolitus Preston, 1909.
Strophocheilus (Dryptus) indentatus da Costa 1901: 239, pl. 24 fig. 8; Pilsbry 1902 [1901–1902]: 281, pl. 49 fig. 7.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) indentatus ; Breure 1979: 44; Breure and Borrero 2008: 8.
Type locality.
“Ecuador”.
Label.
“Ecuador”, in da Costa’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Long. 44, diam. 23 mm.”. Figured specimen H 44.0, D 24.0, W 4.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 1907.11.21.115, lectotype; 1907.11.21.116, one paralectotype (da Costa coll.).
Remarks.
da Costa did not state on how many specimens his description was based. This species has been classified by Thaumastus s.str. by Breure (1979). Upon re-studying the specimens found, however, the protoconch appears to be pit-reticulated and the taxon may be better placed in Kara Strebel, 1910. This taxon is closely allied to Kara thompsonii (Pfeiffer, 1845) and Kara yanamensis (Morelet, 1863), and upon further studies may prove to be a synonym of either of these species.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Kara indentata (da Costa, 1901) (comb. n.).
Bulimus (Thaumastus) insolitus
Preston, 1909
Bulimus (Thaumastus) insolitus Preston 1909: 509, pl. 10 fig. 9; Breure 1979: 44.
Type locality.
“Chanchamayo, Peru”.
Label.
“Chanchamayo Peru”.
Dimensions.
“Alt. 70, diam. maj. 29.5 mm.”. Figured specimen H 70.4, D 31.2, W 5.6.
Type material.
NHMUK 1947.3.11.1, holotype (ex Preston).
Remarks.
Preston wrote “[a]n extraordinary shell”; the singular implies that he had only one specimen at hand, the specimen thus is the holotype. A label states “Purchased from / Preston many years ago / by Mayor Connolly with / others / A. M. N. H. viii p. 509”. The current systematic position follows Richardson (1995: 377) at the species level, the generic classification should be re-evaluated by further studies of the anatomy and by molecular research; this could also affect the arrangement at family level.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus insolitus (Preston, 1909).
Bulimus integer
Pfeiffer, 1855
Figure 5.
Thaumastus species. i–iii Thaumastus integer (Pfeiffer, 1855), lectotype NHMUK 1975244 (H = 81.5) iv–vi Thaumastus loxostomus (Pfeiffer, 1853), syntype NHMUK 1975125 (H = 71.3).
Figure L10.
i Bulimus integer Pfeiffer, 1855 ii Bulimus iris Pfeiffer, 1853 iii Bulimus irroratus Reeve, 1849.
Bulimus integer Pfeiffer 1855d: 114; Pfeiffer 1859: 369; Breure 1979: 44.
Porphyrobaphe integer ; Pilsbry 1899: 153.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) integer ; Breure 1978: 31 (lectotype designation); Breure and Borrero 2008: 8.
Type locality.
“Quito, Ecuador”.
Label.
“Quito”. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 82, diam. 39 mill.”. Figured specimen H 81.5, D 42.0, W 7.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975244, lectotype; 1975245, one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; he did, however, recognize a variety β for which he gave “Long. 65, diam. 31 mill.” as measurements. This was likely a shell from his own collection, as the paralectotype in the Cuming collection has a shell height of 71.6 mm. The protoconch of these type specimens is sculptured with axial wrinkles, becoming coarse granules on the lower part of the protoconch. The generic classification of Breure (1979) is herein tentatively retained, but further studies should clarify the systematic position of this taxon.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus integer (Pfeiffer, 1855).
Bulimus iris
Pfeiffer, 1853
Bulimus iris Pfeiffer 1853b: 313; Pfeiffer 1854b: 136; Pfeiffer 1855 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 244, pl. 65 figs 4–5.
Porphyrobaphe iris ; Pilsbry 1899: 157, pl. 51 figs 28–29.
Type locality.
“Le Ceja, Rio Negro Novae Granadae (Bland)”.
Label.
“La Ceja. Rio Negro / New Grenada”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style I.
Dimensions.
“Long. 64, diam. 32 mill.”. Figured specimen H 72.6, D 41.1, W 5.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 20100506, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described the species from “Mus. Cuming”. Although the specimen is larger than the measurements given by Pfeiffer, there is little doubt it is from the original series as the label confirms the original locality; it also bears the text “please to name this / ‘Blandi’ after the collector”. The specimen is now designated lectotype (design. n.) to fixate this taxon, which needs further study to clarify its status. The mentioning in Linares and Vera (2012: 157) of “ZMUZ 511864” as lectotype for this taxon is erroneous, as this refers to the type specimen of the junior subjective synonym Bulimus wallisianus Mousson, 1873 (see Breure 1976: 3). The current systematic position follows Richardson (1993: 119).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe) iris (Pfeiffer, 1853).
Bulimus irroratus
Reeve, 1849
Figure 15.
Porphyrobaphe species. i–ii Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe) irrorata (Reeve, 1849), syntype NHMUK 1975248 (H = 77.0) iii–v Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe) saturnus (Pfeiffer, 1860), syntype NHMUK 20140080 (H = 75.8).
Bulimus irroratus Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 62 fig. 427; Reeve 1850a: 16; Pfeiffer 1853b: 304.
Porphyrobaphe irrorata ; Pilsbry 1899: 155, pl. 51 figs 36–37; Breure and Schouten 1985: 41 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“Brazil? New Granada?”.
Label.
“Quito Ecuador”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 77.0, D 44.0, W 6+.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975248, three syntypes, A.L. Gubba leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but said it was the “Mus. Cuming (...) thanks to the liberality of A.L. Gubba, Esq., of [Le] Havre”. In Reeve (1850) the locality was mentioned as “—?”. The top of the specimen figured is damaged. The current systematic position is according to Richardson (1993: 119).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Porphyrobaphe irrorata (Reeve, 1849).
Bulimus jeffreysi
Pfeiffer, 1852
Figure L11.
i Bulimus jeffreysi Pfeiffer, 1852 ii Bulimus kelletti Reeve, 1850 iii Bulimus loxostomus Pfeiffer, 1853 iv Achatina magnifica Pfeiffer, 1848.
Bulimus jeffreysi Pfeiffer 1852: 93; Pfeiffer 1853b: 342; Pfeiffer 1854 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 187, pl. 49 figs 9–10.
Drymaeus obliquus (Reeve); Pilsbry 1899: 93, pl. 14 fig. 15.
Leiostracus obliquus ; Simone 2006: 122, fig. 381.
Type locality.
“Brasilia”.
Label.
“Brazils”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style I.
Dimensions.
“Long. 19, diam. 11 mill.”. Figured specimen H 20.4, D 10.9, W 6+.
Type material.
NHMUK 20110083, three syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; he described the taxon “Ex Coll. Cl. Gruner” (Pfeiffer 1852) and specified this later to “Mus. Cuming ex Gruner” (Pfeiffer 1853b). The three specimens found are thus considered to be syntypes; one of these, possibly figured in Pfeiffer 1854 [Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865], is broken. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Leiostracus obliquus (Reeve, 1849).
Bulimus kelletti
Reeve, 1850
Bulimus kelletti Reeve 1850 [1848–1850]: pl. 89 fig. 661; Pfeiffer 1853b: 305.
Orthalicus kellettii ; Pilsbry 1899: 204, pl. 45 figs 23–24.
Sultana (Metorthalicus) kellettii ; Breure and Schouten 1985: 28 (lectotype designation); Breure and Borrero 2008: 26.
Type locality.
“Ecuador?”.
Label.
“?Ecuador”. M.C. label style III, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 61.2, D 33.2, W 5.7.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975241, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
The material is accompanied by a label “the type specimen”. However, Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but only mentioned “this new and very beautiful species”. The specimen found should thus be regarded as lectotype, contradicting the statement by Breure and Borrero (2008), who considered it as holotype.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Metorthalicus) kelletti (Reeve, 1850).
Bulimus loxostomus
Pfeiffer, 1853
Bulimus loxostomus Pfeiffer 1853b: 379; Pfeiffer 1854a: 59.
Strophocheilus loxostomus ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 52.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) loxostomus ; Linares and Vera 2012: 206.
Type locality.
“in Andibus Novae Granadae”.
Label.
“Andes N. Granada”. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 71, diam. 34 mill.”. Figured specimen H 71.3, D 37.3, W 5.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975125, one syntype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but said the material was in “Mus. Cuming”. The protoconch is sculptured with spaced, indistinct wrinkles, becoming closer towards the transition to the teleoconch. The lip is white, which is quite unusual for Thaumastus s.str. Further research should thus shed more light on the systematic position of this taxon, which is here figured for the first time. Linares and Vera (2012) assumed that this taxon was collected in “Colombia, en una localidad no definida”. Although this cannot be excluded, this remains disputable as ‘New Granada’ had a broader political-administrative meaning at the time the specimen was collected. Therefore, at the moment the allocation of this taxon to the Colombian malacofauna remains doubtful at best.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus loxostomus (Pfeiffer, 1853).
Achatina magnifica
Pfeiffer, 1848
Figure 7.
Clathrorthalicus species. i–ii Clathrorthalicus magnificus (Pfeiffer, 1848), syntype NHMUK 20100508 (H = 46.6) iii–v Clathrorthalicus phoebus (Pfeiffer, 1863), lectotype NHMUK 1975143 (H = 30.5) vi–vii Clathrorthalicus victor (Pfeiffer, 1854), lectotype NHMUK 1975242 (H = 64.0).
Achatina magnifica Pfeiffer 1848a: 232; Pfeiffer 1848b: 255.
Liguus (Hemibulimus) magnificus ; E.A. Smith 1907: 314, fig.
Type locality.
“Quito, Ecuador; in woods (De Lattre)”.
Label.
“Quito, Ecuador”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 47, diam. 21 mill.”. Figured specimen H 46.6, D 23.0, W 5.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 20100508, two syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described this taxon from Cuming’s collection. Reeve’s figure (Reeve 1849 [1849–1850]: pl. 9 fig. 33) was from “the collection of J. Dennison, Esq., of which there is also a specimen in the possession of Mr. Cuming [i.e., Pfeiffer’s type]”. This taxon has been incorrectly classified with Hemibulimus Martens, 1885 by Pilsbry (1899: 185)—who copied Reeve’s figure—and Richardson (1993: 71); Pilsbry (1909 [1908–1910]: 117) corrected his mistake. The type material is here re-figured, after E.A. Smith (1907) had figured it for the first time. Although the specimen seems to be slightly subadult, this taxon might be closely allied to Bulimus corydon Crosse, 1869, Bulimus phoebus Pfeiffer, 1863, and Bulimus victor Pfeiffer, 1854. Achatina magnifica is now tentatively placed in Clathrorthalicus Strebel, 1909; however, further anatomical and molecular studies should reveal the correct systematic position.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Clathrorthalicus magnificus (Pfeiffer, 1848) (comb. n.).
Bulimus magnificus
Grateloup, 1839
Figure 6.
Thaumastus species. i–iii Thaumastus magnificus (Grateloup, 1839), lectotype NHMUK 1907.11.22.24 (H = 78.0) iv–vi Thaumastus plumbeus (Pfeiffer, 1855), lectotype NHMUK 1975130 (H = 93.0).
Figure L12.
i Bulimus magnificus Grateloup, 1839 ii Bulimus marmatensis Pfeiffer, 1855.
Bulimus magnificus Grateloup 1839a: 165; Grateloup 1839b: 419, pl. 4 fig. 1; Breure 1979: 44.
Strophocheilus magnificus ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 46, pl. 25 fig. 74.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) magnificus ; Breure 1978: 31 (lectotype designation).
Thaumastus magnificus ; Simone 2006: 153, fig. 521.
Type locality.
“Pérou”.
Label.
“Le Perou (Brésil)”; see remarks.
Dimensions.
“Près de 3 pouces de longueur”; see remarks. Figured specimen H 78.0, D 36.0, W 6.9.
Type material.
NHMUK 1907.11.22.24, lectotype (da Costa coll., ex Grateloup).
Remarks.
Grateloup did not state on how many specimens his description was based; in Grateloup (1839b: 420) he gave as measurements “Hauteur: 80 mill. – Diamètre: 35 Mill.” and said it was from “Mon cabinet”. As Breure (1978) noted, this specimen “From Grateloup Colln.” came to the NHMUK collection via da Costa, who purchased the specimen from the dealers Sowerby and Fulton. Reeve (1848 [1848–1850]) evidently based his description on a different specimen, as he wrote “The shell named Bulimus magnificus by M. Grateloup is, according to the specimen so marked in Mr. Cuming’s collection, a variety of Bulimus Taunaysii [supposed by Reeve to be Férussac’s species] of a lighter brown colour”. Despite the confusing localities (“Brésil” seems to be added in a later hand), the status of this specimen is not disputed herein; the Peruvian locality, however, still needs confirmation. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006), who reported this species from the states of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus magnificus (Grateloup, 1839).
Bulimus marmatensis
Pfeiffer, 1855
Bulimus marmatensis Pfeiffer 1855a: 125; Pfeiffer 1859: 501.
Bulimulus marmatensis ; Pilsbry 1897 [1897–1898]: 61; Linares and Vera 2012: 163.
Type locality.
[Colombia] “Marmato, New Granada”.
Label.
“Marmata / New Grenada”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 17, diam. 10 mill.”. Figured specimen H 15.0, D 11.0, W 5.0.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975330, three syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; he, however, described this taxon from the collection of Cuming. Three specimens were found, two damaged adults and one juvenile. The protoconch is sculptured with axial wrinkles and spiral lines; this taxon—classified by Breure (1979: 63) with Bulimulus Leach, 1814—is therefore now placed in Simpulopsis Beck, 1837 and is considered as junior subjective synonym of Simpulopsis (Eudioptus) citrinovitrea (Moricand, 1836) (comb. n., syn. n.). The taxon is here figured for the first time.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Eudioptus) citrinovitrea (Moricand, 1836).
Orthalicus mars
Pfeiffer, 1861
Figure 13.
i–ii Quechua salteri (Sowerby III, 1890), lectotype NHMUK 1907.11.21.118 (H = 69.9) iii–vi Orthalicus species. iii–iv Orthalicus phlogerus (d’Orbigny, 1835), syntype NHMUK 1854.12.4.86 (H = 59.8) v–vi Orthalicus mars (Pfeiffer, 1861), syntype NHMUK 20100504 (H = 76.6).
Figure L13.
i Orthalicus mars Pfeiffer, 1861 ii Bulimus meobambensis Pfeiffer, 1855 iii Simpulopsis miersi Pfeiffer, 1857.
Orthalicus mars Pfeiffer 1861b: 25, pl. 2 fig. 8; Pfeiffer 1868b: 202; Pilsbry 1899: 143, pl. 53 fig. 42.
Type locality.
“republica Aequatoris (Mr. Fraser)”.
Label.
“Republic of Ecuador”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 77, diam. 35 mill.”. Figured specimen H 76.6, D 38.4, W 6+.
Type material.
NHMUK 20100504, three syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described “from the collection of H. Cuming”. Although on the label has been written in a later hand “none quite like fig.”, the type status is not disputed as the shell height matches the original data. The top of the largest specimen, herein figured, is damaged. Also the top of one of the other specimens is damaged. The protoconch of the third, undamaged, specimen is smooth. This taxon is tentatively classified with Orthalicus Beck, 1837; however, further anatomical and molecular research should provide evidence to assess if this classification is correct or needs to be adjusted.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Orthalicus mars Pfeiffer, 1861.
Bulimus meobambensis
Pfeiffer, 1855
Figure 17.
Sultana species. i–ii Sultana (Methorthalicus) powisiana (Petit de la Saussaye, 1843), holotype of Orthalicus powissianus var. niveus Preston, 1909 NHMUK 1909.8.18.85 (H = 65.2) iii–iv Sultana (Sultana) meobambensis (Pfeiffer, 1855), syntype NHMUK 20100505 (H = 84.9).
Bulimus meobambensis Pfeiffer 1855c: 96; Pfeiffer 1859: 586.
Orthalicus meobambensis ; Pilsbry 1899: 191.
Type locality.
“Meobamba, Eastern Peru (Mr. Yates)”.
Label.
“Meobamba / East Peru”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 88, diam. 46 mill.”. Figured specimen H 84.9, D 52.8, W 6.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 20100505, two syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based. There is no doubt, however, about the type status of the specimens found as he described this taxon from the Cuming collection and the taxon label is—although in pencil—in his handwriting. This is the first time this material is figured; Strebel (1909: pl. 29 fig. 429) figured a specimen from Huagabamba, Peru that E.A. Smith considered conspecific.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Sultana) meobambensis (Pfeiffer, 1855).
Simpulopsis miersi
Pfeiffer, 1857
Simpulopsis miersi Pfeiffer 1857a: 260; Pfeiffer 1859: 800; Reeve 1862: pl. 1 fig. 4; Pilsbry 1899: 218; Breure 1979: 134 (lectotype designation); Simone 2006: 179, fig. 644.
Type locality.
[Brazil] “Espirito Santo Brasiliae (Miers)”.
Label.
“Espirits Santo / F. Miers Esq.”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Diam. maj. 24, alt. 17 1/2 mill.”. Figured specimen H 20.6, D 20.9, W 4.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975489, lectotype; 1975490 one paralectotype (Cuming coll., ex Miers).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but refers to “Mus. Cuming”, and Miers as source. The lectotype is slightly damaged at the body of the last whorl and the lip. The references of Richardson (1993: 364) for this taxon to Pfeiffer 1853b: 333 and Pfeiffer 1859: 396 are erroneous, as these refer to Bulinus miersii Sowerby, 1838. The current systematic position is according to Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) miersi Pfeiffer, 1857.
Achatina murrea
Reeve, 1849
Figure L14.
i Helix miliola d’Orbigny, 1835 ii Achatina murrea Reeve, 1849 iii Orthalicus powissianus var. niveus Preston, 1909 iv Bulimus obliquus Reeve, 1849.
Achatina murrea Reeve 1849 [1849–1850]: pl. 7 fig. 22.
Type locality.
“—?”.
Label.
No locality label, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 38.6, D 19.5, W 7.1.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975482, 20230332, three + three syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but figured two different specimens from “Mus. Cuming”. Three specimens were found in lot NHMUK 1975482, one of which corresponds to Reeve's figure 22a; Pfeiffer has identified this lot as “A. fasciata / Müller juv.”. Lot 20120332 also contains three specimens, one of which was figured as fig. 22b. The current systematic position follows Breure et al. (2014).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Liguus murreus (Reeve, 1849).
Orthalicus powissianus niveus
Preston, 1909
Orthalicus powissianus var. niveus Preston 1909: 512.
Type locality.
“Jimenez, Rio Dagua, West Colombia”.
Label.
“Jimenez Rio Dagua / 1600 ft. Colombia”, in Preston’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 65.2, D 31.3, W 7.2.
Type material.
NHMUK 1909.8.18.85, holotype, M.G. Palmer leg., ex Preston.
Remarks.
Preston mentioned “taken with the animal alive”, from which may be inferred that he had only one specimen at hand. The specimen located is thus the holotype; the top is slightly damaged. The taxon is here figured for the first time. The current systematic position at species level follows Richardson (1993: 125).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Methorthalicus) powisiana (Petit de la Saussaye, 1843).
Bulimus obliquus
Reeve, 1849
Figure 22.
Leiostracus species. i–iii Leiostracus obliquus (Reeve, 1849), lectotype NHMUK 1975493 (H = 22.7) iv–v Leiostracus perlucidus (Spix, 1827), probable syntype of Bulinus opalinus Sowerby I, 1833 NHMUK 1975442 (H 27.8) vi–viii Leiostracus sarcochilus (Pfeiffer, 1857), lectotype NHMUK 1975398 (H = 24.7).
Bulimus obliquus Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 76 fig. 551; Pfeiffer 1853b: 342; Breure 1979: 127.
Drymaeus obliquus ; Pilsbry 1899: 93, pl. 14 fig. 14.
Leiostracus (Leiostracus) obliquus ; Breure 1978: 227 (lectotype designation).
Leiostracus obliquus ; Simone 2006: 122, fig. 381.
Type locality.
[Brazil] “Bahia”.
Label.
“Brazil”. M.C. label style I, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 22.7, D 12.05, W 6+.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975493, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but mentioned “[a] pink shell”; this is herein not considered as sufficient evidence that he had only one shell for his description. The material was in “Mus. Cuming”. The top and the apertural lip of the specimen found are damaged. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Leiostracus obliquus (Reeve, 1849).
Bulinus opalinus
Sowerby I, 1833
Figure L15.
i Bulinus opalinus Sowerby I, 1833 ii Bulimus ovulum Reeve, 1849 iii Helix phlogera d’Orbigny, 1835 iv Bulimus phoebus Pfeiffer, 1863 v Helix progastor d’Orbigny, 1835.
Bulinus opalinus Sowerby I 1833 in Sowerby I and II 1832–1841: 7, fig. 47; Sowerby I in Gray and Sowerby I 1839: 144, pl. 38 fig. 8.
Bulimus opalinus ; Pfeiffer 1848b: 107.
Leiostracus perlucidus ; Simone 2006: 123, fig. 384.
Type locality.
“Brazil”.
Label.
“Brazil”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 27.8, D 14.3, W 7.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975442, three probable syntypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Sowerby did not state on how many specimens his description was based; he wrote “Nob.”, thus “ours”, meaning the author claimed his right as describer of the new taxon, not necessarily proof of presence in his own collection. As Breure and Ablett (2011: 10) suggested that these might have been swapped with Cuming, the three specimens found are treated as probable syntypes. They are accompanied by two labels in Pfeiffer’s handwriting; one “Bul. opalinus / Sow”, the other in different ink “perlucidus Spix”. In Pfeiffer 1848: 108 the dimensions “Long. 27, diam. 14 mill.” were given; this corresponds to the largest specimen in the lot. The citation in Richardson (1995: 207) to “Pfeiffer, Mono. Helic. Viv. 1: 231” refers to Helix opalina Sowerby I, 1841, and is thus in error. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Leiostracus perlucidus (Spix, 1827).
Bulimus ovulum
Reeve, 1849
Bulimus ovulum Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 76 fig. 556; Breure 1979: 131. pl. 12 fig. 48.
Rhinus ovulum ; Breure 1978: 232 (lectotype designation); Simone 2006: 129, fig. 412.
Type locality.
“Philippine Islands; Cuming”.
Label.
“Pernambuco, Brazil”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style I, V.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 20.1, D 12.3, W 6.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975416, lectotype; 1975417, two paralectotypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Reeve did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but mentioned “A shell of rather solid growth...”; this is herein not considered as sufficient evidence that he had only one shell for his description. The material was in “Mus. Cuming”. Richardson (1995: 226) incorrectly classified this taxon with Naesiotus Albers, 1850. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006); the shell height given by him is erroneous.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Rhinus ovulum (Reeve, 1849).
Helix phlogera
d’Orbigny, 1835
Helix phlogera d’Orbigny 1835: 8.
Bulimus phlogerus ; d’Orbigny 1837 [1834–1847]: 259, pl. 29 figs 6–8 [text 30 March 1838]; Gray 1854: 12.
Type locality.
“provincia Chiquitensi (republica Boliviana)”.
Label.
“Sn Xavier, Chquitos (Bolivia)”, in d’Orbigny’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Longit. 55 millim.; latit. 24 millim.”. Figured specimen H 59.8, D 26.8, W 6+.
Type material.
NHMUK 1854.12.4.86, six syntypes (d’Orbigny coll.).
Remarks.
d’Orbigny (1835) did not state on how many specimens his description was based; he said his taxon was identical to Helix regina var. β Férussac, 1821. In d’Orbigny (1838 [1834–1847]: 260) the locality was specified as “environs des Missions de San-Xavier et de Concepcion”; see Breure 1973. Of the material found, none of the shells corresponds exactly with d’Orbigny’s figure. The current systematic position is according to Richardson (1993: 108).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Orthalicus phlogerus (d’Orbigny, 1835).
Bulimus phoebus
Pfeiffer, 1863
Bulimus phoebus Pfeiffer 1863: 274; Pfeiffer 1868b: 9; Breure 1979: 30 (lectotype designation).
Plekocheilus phoebus ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 81.
Plekocheilus (Eurytus) phoebus ; Breure 1978: 15, pl. 11 fig. 6; Breure and Borrero 2008: 6.
Type locality.
“Ecuador”.
Label.
“Ecuador”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 31, diam. 15 mill.”. Figured specimen H 30.5, D 17.5, W 5.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975143, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described his material “from the collection of H. Cuming”. This taxon has long been associated with Plekocheilus (Eurytus) Albers, 1850, but re-examination of the type—of which the protoconch proves to be smooth—plus recent collections in north-western Ecuador (Breure unpublished data) reveal that this taxon belongs to Clathrorthalicus Strebel, 1909. It may be closely allied to Bulimus corydon Crosse, 1869, Bulimus magnificus Pfeiffer, 1848 and Bulimus victor Pfeiffer, 1854; however, further anatomical and molecular studies should clarify the current systematic position.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Clathrorthalicus phoebus (Pfeiffer, 1863) (comb. n.).
Bulimus plumbeus
Pfeiffer, 1855
Figure L16.
i Bulimus plumbeus Pfeiffer, 1855 ii Bulimus requieni Pfeiffer, 1853 iii Bulimus porphyrius Pfeiffer, 1847 iv Vitrina salomonia Pfeiffer, 1853 v Bulimus sarcochilus Pfeiffer, 1857.
Bulimus plumbeus Pfeiffer 1855d: 114; Pfeiffer 1859: 369; Breure 1979: 44.
Strophocheilus plumbeus ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 49.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) plumbeus ; Breure 1978: 31, pl. 11 fig. 1 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“Venezuela”.
Label.
“Venezuela”. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 93, diam. 36 mill.”. Figured specimen H 93.0, D 40.5, W 5.9.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975130, lectotype; 1975131, one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described his material “from the collection of H. Cuming”. Although there is no label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting, the type status of these specimens is not disputed as the shell height matches the original data. This taxon has been considered a junior subjective synonym of Helix (Cochlogena) pardalis Férussac, 1821 (Richardson 1995: 202), but re-examination of the type leads us to tentatively retain the classification of Breure (1978). It may be noted that the locality of this taxon is well outside the range of Thaumastus; however, it could possibly occur in southwestern Venezuela. Once located, further anatomical and molecular studies should shed more light on its systematic position.
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus plumbeus (Pfeiffer, 1855).
Bulimus porphyrius
Pfeiffer, 1847
Bulimus porphyrius Pfeiffer 1847: 114; Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 15 fig. 89; Pfeiffer 1848b: 199; Breure 1979: 41.
Thaumastus (Scholvienia) porphyrius ; Breure 1978: 46 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“Bolivia (T. Bridges)”.
Label.
“Bolivia”, “andes of Caxamarca / Peru”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV, V.
Dimensions.
“Long. 51, diam. 20 mill.”. Figured specimen H 51.5, D 22.0, W 6.6.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975277, lectotype; 1975278, two paralectotypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; it was, however, one of the taxa from the Cuming collection. Breure (1978) has discussed the localities and suggested that both labels are probably erroneous. This taxon has hitherto been classified with Thaumastus (Scholvienia) Strebel, 1910. Given the results of Breure and Romero (2012), who found that subgenera of Thaumastus belong to different families, the familiar association of this taxon is tentatively made to the Orthalicidae, and Scholvienia is provisionally given generic status. Further anatomical and molecular studies should shed more light on its systematic position.
Current systematic position.
?Orthalicidae, Scholvienia porphyria (Pfeiffer, 1847) (comb. n.).
Bulimus requieni
Pfeiffer, 1853
Figure 29.
i–ii Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) vincentina E.A. Smith, 1895, holotype NHMUK 1895.6.17.458 (H = 11.4) iii–iv Thaumastus requieni (Pfeiffer, 1853), lectotype NHMUK 1975301 (H = 62.0).
Bulimus requieni Pfeiffer 1853b: 389; Pfeiffer 1854b: 137; Pfeiffer 1855 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 248, pl. 66 fig. 8; Breure 1979: 44.
Strophocheilus requieni ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 55, pl. 27 fig. 94.
Thaumastus (Thaumastus) requieni ; Breure 1978: 31 (lectotype designation).
Thaumastus requieni ; Simone 2006: 154, fig. 523.
Type locality.
“Brasilia”.
Label.
“Brazils”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
“Long. 62, diam. 26 mill.”. Figured specimen H 62.0, D 29.0, W 5.3+.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975301, lectotype; 1975302, one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but described his material from “Mus. Cuming”. The top of the lectotype is slightly damaged. The protoconch is sculptured with slightly waving axial riblets. Both specimens appear to be subadult; further studies are needed to ascertain the taxonomic position of this taxon. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006).
Current systematic position.
Megaspiridae, Thaumastus requieni (Pfeiffer, 1853).
Vitrina salomonia
Pfeiffer, 1853
Figure 26.
Simpulopsis species. i–iii Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) rufovirens (Moricand, 1846), lectotype of Vitrina salomonia Pfeiffer, 1853 NHMUK 1975485 (H = 11.1) iv–vi Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) simula (Morelet, 1851), syntype NHMUK 1893.2.4.1128 (H = 8.26).
Vitrina salomonia Pfeiffer 1853a: 51; Pfeiffer 1853b: 623; Pfeiffer 1854a: 60.
Simpulopsis salomonia ; Pfeiffer 1854 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 29, pl. 6 figs 17–19; Reeve 1862: pl. 2 fig. 8.
Simpulopsis (?) salomonia ; Pilsbry 1899: 226, pl. 63 figs 76–78.
Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) rufovirens (Moricand); Breure 1978: 232 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“in insulis Salomonis”.
Label.
“Solomons Isl”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 11, diam. 9 mill.”. Figured specimen H 11.1, D 10.7, W 4.5.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975485, lectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but noted “Mus. Cuming”. He also remarked “Diese Art ist mit der brasilianischen Gruppe Simpulopsis Beck sehr nahe verwandt”, which might have led Pilsbry (1899: 226) to suggest that the locality given by Pfeiffer was erroneous. Breure (1978) suggested that this taxon might be a junior subjective synonym of Helix (Succinea) rufovirens Moricand, 1846. Richardson (1995: 367) considered this taxon as a separate species; Simone (2006) did not mention it at all. Tentatively the classification of this taxon by Breure (1978) is herein retained, until a further revision of this group clarifies its taxonomic status.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) rufovirens (Moricand, 1846).
Bulimus salteri
Sowerby III, 1890
Figure L17.
i Bulimus salteri Sowerby III, 1890 ii Bulimus simulus Morelet, 1851 iii Bulimus thompsonii Pfeiffer, 1845 iv Strophocheilus (Eurytus) subirroratus da Costa, 1898 v Bulimus saturnus Pfeiffer, 1860.
Bulimus salteri Sowerby III 1890: 578, pl. 50 fig. 4; Breure 1979: 45.
Type locality.
“Catamarca, Andes Peruviae”.
Label.
“Andes of Peru”; printed label.
Dimensions.
“Long. 70, maj. diam. 35 mill.”. Figured specimen H 69.9, D 35.2, W 6.0.
Type material.
NHMUK 1907.11.21.118, lectotype (da Costa coll.).
Remarks.
Sowerby also described a (larger) “var. γ”, and remarked “[t]he two shells form part of the collection of Mr. S.J. Da Costa, and there is a specimen of each variety [typical one and var. γ] in the National Collection at South Kensington [= NHMUK]”. The original series thus seems to have comprised two specimens, and the reference in Breure (1979) to “HT BMNH 1907.11.21.118” has to be interpreted as lectotype designation under Art. 74.6 ICZN, also following Recommendation 73F. We have, however, not been able to locate a varietal form of this taxon in the da Costa collection within the NHMUK. In the General collection we found two specimens. One is labeled “Thaumastus salteri / Andes of Peru / Purch Sowerby”, and is registered as NHMUK 1883.10.24.8 (it is listed in the register as Orthalicus and no specific name). The second specimen is labelled “salteri var. / Peru / Mus. Cuming”; this is the only specimen with a varietal label, but nonetheless dubious if it belonged to the original series and Sowerby’s varietal shell may have been lost from the collection. This taxon has hitherto been classified with Thaumastus (Quechua) Strebel, 1910. Given the results of Breure and Romero (2012), who found that subgenera of Thaumastus belong to different families, the familial association of this taxon is tentatively made to the Orthalicidae, and Quechua is provisionally given generic status, pending further anatomical and molecular studies.
Current systematic position.
?Orthalicidae, Quechua salteri (Sowerby III, 1890) (comb. n.).
Bulimus sarcochilus
Pfeiffer, 1857
Bulimus sarcochilus Pfeiffer 1857e: 157; Pfeiffer 1859: 412; Breure 1979: 127.
Bulimulus sarcochilus ; Pilsbry 1897 [1897–1898]: 80.
Leiostracus (Leiostracus) sarcochilus ; Breure 1978: 227, figs 396–397 (lectotype designation).
Leiostracus sarcochilus ; Simone 2006: 123, fig. 386.
Type locality.
“in Brasilia septentrionali (Miers)”.
Label.
“North of Brazils / F. Miers Esq”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style I.
Dimensions.
“Long. 21–25, diam. 10–11 1/2 mill.”. Figured specimen H 24.7, D 13.1, W 7.7.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975398, lectotype; 1975399, one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based, but from his dimensions it is clear that he had more than one specimen at hand. From Pfeiffer (1859) it becomes clear that this was one of the taxa described from “Mus. Cuming”. Breure (1978) re-described the species on the basis of additional material and established the first exact locality in state Espírito Santo. The current systematic position follows Simone (2006), whose reference to the figured type as “syntype” is erroneous.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Leiostracus sarcochilus (Pfeiffer, 1857).
Bulimus saturnus
Pfeiffer, 1860
Bulimus saturanus Pfeiffer 1860: 136.
Bulimus satuanus Pfeiffer 1860: pl. 51 fig. 6.
Bulimus saturnus ; Pfeiffer 1861a: 11; Pfeiffer 1868b: 14.
Porphyrobaphe saturnus ; Pilsbry 1899: 154, pl. 50 fig. 25.
Type locality.
“Pallatanga, Republic of Ecuador (Mr. Fraser)”.
Label.
“Pallatango Republic of Ecuador Mr Fraser”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style I.
Dimensions.
“Long. 76, diam. 33 mill.”. Figured specimen H 75.8, D 38.4, W 6.7.
Type material.
NHMUK 20140080, three syntypes, Fraser leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based. In the original paper he made twice an error in the name, which was corrected in Pfeiffer (1861a; without explicit comment), and Pfeiffer (1868; “sphalm. Saturanus”); this is treated as a lapsus calami under Art. 32.1 jo. 24.2.4 ICZN. Breure and Borrero (2008: 28) have pointed out that “Pallatanga” could not be assigned unequivocally to a locality, as it is found twice in modern gazetteers.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Porphyrobaphe (Porphyrobaphe) saturnus (Pfeiffer, 1860).
Bulimus simulus
Morelet, 1851
Bulimus simulus Morelet 1851: 11; Pfeiffer 1853d: 383; Breure 1979: 134.
Type locality.
[Guatemala] “sylvas Petenensis”.
Label.
“forêt de Dolores”, taxon label in Morelet’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Longit. 11 – Diam. 9 [mm]”. Figured specimen H 8.26, D 6.79, W 4.3.
Type material.
NHMUK 1893.2.4.1128–1129, two syntypes (Morelet coll.).
Remarks.
Morelet did not state on how many specimens his description was based. On the board on which the labels are glued has been written in a later hand “Type largest / Test. Noviss. No. 101”. The locality on the label probably refers to the village of Dolores, Petén, Guatemala, which is thus the exact type locality. The current systematic position follows Thompson (2011: 130).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulopsis (Simpulopsis) simula (Morelet, 1851).
Strophocheilus (Eurytus) subirroratus
da Costa, 1898
Figure 16.
i–iv Porphyrobaphe (Oxyorthalicus) subirroratus (da Costa, 1898), lectotype NHMUK 1907.11.21.114 (H = 62.6).
Strophocheilus (Eurytus) subirroratus da Costa 1898: 83, fig. II; Breure and Schouten 1985: 54.
Porphyrobaphe subirroratus ; Pilsbry 1901 [1901–1902]: 163, pl. 24 fig. 11.
Porphyrobaphe (Oxyorthalicus) subirroratus ; Breure and Borrero 2008: 29.
Type locality.
“Paramba, Ecuador”.
Label.
“Paramba, Ecuador”, in da Costa’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Long. 63, diam. 33 mm.”. Figured specimen H 62.6, D 36.6, W 5.9.
Type material.
NHMUK 1907.11.21.114, lectotype (da Costa coll.).
Remarks.
da Costa did not state on how many specimens his description was based; the reference in Breure and Schouten (1985) to “HT BMNH 1907.11.21.114” has to be interpreted as lectotype designation under Art. 74.6 ICZN. The current systematic position follows Breure and Borrero (2008). However, it should be noted that Strebel (1909: 120)—after establishing the subgenus Oxyorthalicus—wrote “Die Skulpturbeschreibung [by da Costa] bezw. das Fehlen der erhabenen Streifen scheint mir für die Untergattung unwahrscheinlich”. Further anatomical and molecular research should thus shed more light on the taxonomic position.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Porphyrobaphe (Oxyorthalicus) subirroratus (da Costa, 1898).
Drymaeus (Leiostracus) onager subtuszonata
Pilsbry, 1899
Figure L19.
i Simpulosis vincentina E.A. Smith, 1895 ii Bulimus yatesi Pfeiffer, 1855 iii Drymaeus (Leiostracus) onager var. subtuszonata Pilsbry, 1899.
Bulimus onager Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 45 fig. 284. Not Bulimulus onager Beck, 1837.
Drymaeus (Leiostracus) onager var. subtuszonata Pilsbry 1899: 95, pl. 14 fig. 17.
Leiostracus subtuzonatus [sic]; Simone 2006: 123, fig. 387B.
Type locality.
Not given.
Label.
Not given [“Brazil” added in a later hand]. M.C. label style I, V.
Dimensions.
“[L]ength of 28 mm”. Figured specimen H 29.0, D 14.8, W 7.9.
Type material.
NHMUK 20130094, three probable paralectotypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pilsbry did not state on how many specimens his description was based, and gave no type locality as he described what he regarded as a colour variation only. His figure was a black and white copy of Reeve’s figure. Salvador and Cavallari (2013) have given this variety specific status and designated a specimen from MZSP as neotype. In doing so they disregarded material in the NHMUK (Reeve) and ANSP (Pilsbry), and their designation did not fulfil the requirements of Art. 75 ICZN. Salvador et al. (2014) corrected this issue and selected the figure of Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 45 fig. 284 as lectotype, in accordance with Recommendation 74B ICZN. The specimens found are accompanied by a Reeve label, but cannot be matched exactly to his figure; they are considered as probable paralectotypes.
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Leiostracus subtuszonatus (Pilsbry, 1899).
Bulimus thompsonii
Pfeiffer, 1845
Bulimus thompsonii Pfeiffer 1845: 74; Pfeiffer 1848b: 141; Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 24 fig. 158; Breure 1979: 40.
Thaumastus (Kara) thompsoni [sic]; Breure 1978: 34 (lectotype designation); Breure and Borrero 2008: 7.
Type locality.
[Ecuador] “Quito. (Coll. Cuming)”.
Label.
“Quito”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style IV, V.
Dimensions.
“Long. 70, diam. 31 mill.”. Figured specimen H 71.0, D 32.0, W 6.2.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975464, lectotype; 1975465, two paralectotypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The specimen figured by Reeve has been selected lectotype by Breure (1978); the paralectotypes are less slender. On the basis of molecular analyses of Breure and Romero (2012), the genus Kara Strebel, 1910 has been placed in the family Orthalicidae (Breure 2011).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Kara thompsonii (Pfeiffer, 1845).
Porphyrobaphe vicaria
Fulton, 1896
Figure 20.
Sultana (Metorthalicus) yatesi (Pfeiffer, 1855) i–ii Holotype of Porphyrobaphe vicaria Fulton, 1896 NHMUK 20100507 (H = 82.2) iii–iv Lectotype NHMUK 1975239/1 (H 84.3).
Figure L18.
i Porphyrobaphe vicaria Fulton, 1896 ii Bulimus yanamensis Morelet, 1863 iii Bulimus victor Pfeiffer, 1854.
Bulimus labeo Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 71 fig. 207b, pl. 72 fig. 207c. Not Bulimus labeo Broderip, 1828.
Porphyrobaphe vicaria Fulton 1896: 103.
Type locality.
“Leimabamba, Peru, 8000 feet (O.T. Baron)”.
Label.
“Limabambo Peru”. M.C. label style IV.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 82.2, D 46.7, W 6.3+.
Type material.
NHMUK 20100507, holotype, Lobb leg. (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Fulton mentioned “[t]ype in British Museum (Cuming Collection)”, and said his taxon had been figured by Reeve. Reeve wrote: “It is with much gratification that I am enabled to give an original figure of the Bulimus labeo, figured at. Pl. XXXV, from a figure in the Zoological Journal. This shell, from the Cumingian collection, which I take to be identical with the lost specimen [see Pain 1959] (...). It was collected by Mr. Lobb at Limabamba, Peru; a district seldom visited by travellers, and the same in which Lieut. Mawe obtained the original specimen.” From this text it may be concluded that Reeve had only seen one specimen, identical to the lost type of Broderip; Reeve’s shell is thus the holotype of Fulton’s taxon. It is also clear that the altitude and collector data given by Fulton are erroneous. The current systematic position at species level follows Richardson (1993: 128).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Metorthalicus) yatesi (Pfeiffer, 1855).
Bulimus victor
Pfeiffer, 1854
Bulimus victor Pfeiffer 1854d: 128; Pfeiffer 1859: 368; Pfeiffer 1861 [1860–1866]: 169, pl. 46 figs 1–2; Breure and Schouten 1985: 55 (lectotype designation).
Plekocheilus victor ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 82, pl. 33 figs 47–48; Linares and Vera 2012: 174.
Type locality.
“in provincia Antioquia, Columbiae (Schlim)”.
Label.
“Province of Antioquia / [...] Schlim [...]”, taxon label in Pfeiffer’s handwriting. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 65, diam. 29 mill.”. Figured specimen H 64.0, D 36.7, W 5+.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975242, lectotype; 20100567, one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; besides the specimen corresponding to Pfeiffer’s dimensions, and selected lectotype by Breure and Schouten (1985), a second specimen was found designated as “var.” by Pfeiffer (1861: 169). The label accompanying the lectotype is partly fading away; the apex of this specimen is missing. This species has been listed by Richardson (1993: 120) under Porphyrobaphe Shuttleworth, 1856, and also under Plekocheilus Guilding, 1828 (Richardson 1995: 324). The reference of Linares and Vera (2012) for this species from Putumayo must be viewed with suspicion until the voucher specimen has been studied, as there may be a confusion with a local Plekocheilus species. This taxon has long been associated with Plekocheilus (Eurytus) Albers, 1850, but re-examination of the type material—the protoconch of the paralectotype proves to be smooth—plus recent collections in north-western Ecuador (Breure unpublished data) reveal that this taxon belongs to Clathrorthalicus Strebel, 1909. It may be closely allied to Bulimus corydon Crosse, 1869, Bulimus magnificus Pfeiffer, 1848, and Bulimus phoebus Pfeiffer, 1863; however, further anatomical and molecular studies should reveal the correct systematic position.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Clathrorthalicus victor (Pfeiffer, 1854) (comb. n.).
Simpulosis vincentina
E.A. Smith, 1895
Simpulosis vincentina E.A. Smith 1895: 305, pl. 21 figs 4–5; Pilsbry 1899: 219, pl. 63 figs 65–66; Breure 1979: 134.
Type locality.
[West Indies, St. Vincent] “Damp forest, Upper Richmond valley, 2000 ft, on leaves of Artanthe (Piperacea) (H.H. Smith)”.
Label.
“Damp forest, Upper Richmond valley, 2000 ft, on leaves of Artanthe (Piperacea), St. Vincent, B.W.I.”.
Dimensions.
“Longit. 13, diam. maj. 10 mm”. Figured specimen H 11.4, D 10.2, W 2.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 1895.6.17.458, holotype, H.H. Smith leg.
Remarks.
E.A. Smith wrote “[o]nly a single specimen was collected.” Both body of the last whorl and the lip are partly broken in the holotype. The current systematic position follows Richardson (1995: 368).
Current systematic position.
Simpulopsidae, Simpulosis (Simpulopsis) vincentina E.A. Smith, 1895.
Bulimus yanamensis
Morelet, 1863
Bulimus yanamensis Morelet 1863: 171, pl. 8 fig. 3; Pilsbry 1868: 87; Breure 1979: 40.
Strophocheilus yanamensis ; Pilsbry 1895 [1895–1896]: 54, pl. 27 fig. 97.
Thaumastus (Kara) yanamensis ; Breure 1978: 34 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
[Peru] “Yanama”.
Label.
“Yanama. Pérou”, taxon label in Morelet’s handwriting.
Dimensions.
“Longit. 58; diam. 25 (...) mill.”. Figured specimen H 48.6, D 26.9, W 5.4.
Type material.
NHMUK 1893.2.4.167–168, [two paralectotypes] (Morelet coll.).
Remarks.
Morelet did not state on how many specimens his description was based; the two specimens mentioned by Breure (1978) were absent, although the labels of the lot have been found and a picture has been taken. The lectotype is present in the MNHG collection. This taxon has been associated with the genus Kara Strebel, 1910. On the basis of molecular analyses of Breure and Romero (2012), this genus has been placed in the family Orthalicidae (Breure 2011).
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Kara yanamensis (Morelet, 1863).
Bulimus yatesi
Pfeiffer, 1855
Bulimus yatesi Pfeiffer 1855c: 93, pl. 31 fig. 5; Pfeiffer 1856 [1854–1860]: 63, pl. 18 figs 1–2; Pfeiffer 1859: 371.
Orthalicus yatesi ; Pilsbry 1899: 202, pl. 43 fig. 17.
Sultana (Metorthalicus) yatesi ; Breure and Schouten 1985: 28 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
“Meobamba, Eastern Peru (Mr. Yates)”.
Label.
“Meobamba, East Peru”. M.C. label style III.
Dimensions.
“Long. 82, diam. 32 mill.”. Figured specimen H 84.3, D 39.7, W 7.2.
Type material.
NHMUK 1975239/1, lectotype; 1975239/2–3, two paralectotypes (Cuming coll.).
Remarks.
Pfeiffer did not state on how many specimens his description was based; Pfeiffer (1856 [1854–1860]) mentioned “Aus H. Cumings’s und meiner Sammlung”. The specimen figured by Pfeiffer (1855c) was selected lectotype by Breure and Schouten (1985). The current systematic position follows Richardson (1993: 127) at the species level.
Current systematic position.
Orthalicidae, Sultana (Metorthalicus) yatesi (Pfeiffer, 1855).
Addenda et corrigenda
I. Nomen inquirendum
The systematic position of the following taxon cannot be ascertained at present, and it is herein considered a nomen inquirendum.
Bulimulus (Protoglyptus) dejectus
Fulton, 1907
Bulimulus (Protoglyptus) dejectus Fulton 1907: 153, pl. 10 fig. 1; Breure 2011: 22, fig. 15B, 15iii.
Protoglyptus dejectus ; Simone 2006: 148, fig. 500A.
Type locality.
“Santa Catarina (fide Linnaea Institute label)”.
Label.
“St. Catharina”.
Dimensions.
“Maj. diam. 10, alt. 29 mm”. Figured specimen H 29.2, D 10.0, W 7.8.
Type material.
NHMUK 1907.5.3.163, lectotype (ex Sowerby and Fulton).
Remarks.
Fulton did not state on how many specimens his description was based. The specimen found agrees with Fulton’s measurements and is now designated lectotype (design. n.). The sculpture of the protoconch is not with axial wrinkles as usual in Protoglyptus Pilsbry, 1897, but with axial wrinkles, partly broken into granules. It may be noted that all species currently classified with this genus occur in the West Indies (Breure and Romero 2012; Breure and Ablett 2014). Breure (2011) retained this taxon with this genus, but expressed doubts and suggested further research. The surface of the teleoconch has spiral series of small granules, denoting an epidermis covered with hairs when fresh; this has both been observed in some species of Rhinus Albers, 1860, and Naesiotus Albers, 1850. Although the shape of the shell cannot be conclusive evidence for generic classification, it may be noted that Fulton compared this species to Helix crepundia d’Orbigny, 1835, which has been classified with Naesiotus sensu lato (Breure and Ablett 2014). Only further anatomical and molecular work can shed more light on the correct systematic position of this taxon.
Current systematic position.
?Bulimulidae, ?Naesiotus dejectus (Fulton, 1907). Nomen inquirendum.
II. Types not located.
Type material of the following taxa, previously known to be extant in the NHMUK, has not been found during our study.
Bulimus dennisoni
Reeve, 1848
Bulimus dennisoni Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 26 fig. 166; Pfeiffer 1853b: 380; Pfeiffer 1855 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 245, pl. 66 figs 1–2.
Hemibulimus (Myiorthalicus) dennisoni ; Breure and Schouten 1985: 46.
Type locality.
“—?”.
Dimensions.
Not given.
Remarks.
The two syntypes mentioned by Breure and Schouten (1985) could not be located during our research. The size of these specimens falls within the variation mentioned by Pfeiffer (1853d: “71–83 mill.”) for material from Cuming’s and Dennison’s collection.
Helix miliola
d’Orbigny, 1835
Helix miliola d’Orbigny 1835: 17.
Pupa miliola d’Orbigny 1838 [1834–1847]: 323; Gray 1854: 24.
Type locality.
“imperio Brasiliano”.
Dimensions.
“Latit. 2 millim., longit. 1 millim.”.
Type material.
NHMUK 1854.12.4.239, [seven syntypes] (d’Orbigny coll.).
Remarks.
Seven specimens were known to be present (cf. the registration book, which has an undated note in pencil “6 missing”), but none could not be found. This taxon has been mentioned under two different species by Richardson (1993: 36, as synonym of Bulinus janeirensis Sowerby I, 1833; 1993: 47, as synonym of Odontostomus juvencus Mörch, 1852). The former is an erroneously reference to d’Orbigny 1837 [1834–1847]: pl. 39 figs 1–2, who corrected the legend to his figure to Bulimus fuscagula d’Orbigny “(figuré sous le faux nom de Bulimus Miliola)”; d’Orbigny 1846 [1834–1847]: 696.
Helix progastor
d’Orbigny, 1835
Helix progastor d’Orbigny 1835: 2; d’Orbigny 1836 [1834–1847]: 255, pl. 22 figs 12–15 [text 30 March 1838]; Gray 1854: 12.
Simpulopsis progastor ; Pilsbry 1899: 223, pl. 64 figs 1–3.
Eudioptus progastor ; Simone 2006: 180, fig. 655.
Type locality.
“Brasilianis oris”.
Dimensions.
“Longit. 7 millim.”.
Type material.
NHMUK 1854.12.4.72, [one syntype] (d’Orbigny coll.).
Remarks.
d’Orbigny (1838 [1834–1847]: 255) specified the type locality as “la province des Mines” [Minas Gerais]. This taxon was marked in Gray (1854) with “B.M.” [NHMUK], but the type material has not been located during our research.
Bulimus vitrinoides
Reeve, 1848
Bulimus vitrinoides Reeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 46 fig. 290; Breure 79: 136.
Type locality.
“—?” “Mus. Cuming”.
Dimensions.
Not given.
Remarks.
The syntype material mentioned by Breure (1979) has not been located during our study. It is possible that this material has not been registered. However, the NHMUK copy of Reeve (1848–1850) for Bulimus vitrinoides has the species name crossed out and ‘citrino-vitreus Moricand’ penciled in. In the general collection one lot was found (registered NHMUK 1841.4.28.110); one specimen matches the illustration but is smaller. These specimens are not considered type material as they are not from the Cuming collection but were ‘purchased of M. M. Parreys d’Vienna’.
III. Types not found in NHMUK, but expected to be present.
The following taxa were expected to be represented with type material; however, no material could be found matching the data in the original publication.
Bulinus adamsoniiJ.E. Gray 1834: 123.—Described from “the collection of Mr. Adamson in Newcastle”, of which the fate is unknown.
Bulini guadaloupensis alba Sowerby I in J.E. Gray and Sowerby I 1839: 144, pl. 38 fig. 13.
Achatina atramentariaPfeiffer 1855d: 116.—Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus aulacostylusPfeiffer 1853b: 316.—Described from “Mus. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulinus bilabiatusBroderip and Sowerby I 1829: 49, suppl. pl. 40 figs 1–2.—The specimens figured by Reeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 83 figs 201a–b are present in the General Collection (NHMUK 20110080).
Bulinus bilineatusSowerby I 1833: 37.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulinus bivittatusSowerby I 1833 [Sowerby I and II 1832–1841]: 7, fig. 46.
Bulimus blainvilleanusPfeiffer 1848a: 230.—Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus bolivianusReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 44 fig. 281.—Described from “Mus. Denisson”.
Bulinus cactivorus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 31—Five specimens were found in the General Collection, of which one may have been illustrated by Sowerby I 1833 [Sowerby I and II 1832–1841]: fig. 2. However, the label reads “Peru”, and thus does not correspond to the type locality given in the original publication (“Montechris in West Columbia”).
Bulimus cantatusReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 56 fig. 375.—Described from “Mus. Denisson”.
Bulimus cardinalisPfeiffer 1853b: 316.—Described from “Mus. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus castelnauiPfeiffer 1857c: 332.— Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus castrensisPfeiffer 1847: 115.— Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimulus (Drymaeus) chacoensisPreston 1907: 491, fig. 5.
Bulimus coerulescensPfeiffer 1858: 257.— Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus columellarisReeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 73 fig. 528.—Described from “Mus. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus confinusReeve 1850 [1848–1850]: pl. 86 fig. 643.—Described from “Mus. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus coniformisPfeiffer 1847: 114.— Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, with type locality [Venezuela] “Merida, Andes of Bolivia”; material found in the Cuming collection have lost their label with Pfeiffer’s handwriting and have “Venezuela” as locality, and is not considered type material.
Bulimus constrictusReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 47 fig. 307.— Described from “Mus. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus contortuplicatusReeve 1850 [1848–1850]: pl. 88 fig. 658.—Described from “Mus. Miers”.
Bulinus coquimbensis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 30.— Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulinus corneusSowerby I 1833: 37.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulinus corrugatus King in King and Broderip 1831: 341.—“A specimen is deposited in the British Museum”, but has not been found.
Bulimus curianianusReeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 58 fig. 390.—Described from “Mus. Dyson”.
Bulinus decoloratusSowerby I 1833: 73.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus draparnaudiPfeiffer 1847: 113.— Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus drouetiPfeiffer 1857b: 319, pl. 35 fig. 12.—The material found is from the Cuming collection, but lacks evidence that is was collected by Sallé.
Bulimus eganus Pfeiffer 1853 in Küster and Pfeiffer 1840–1865: 85, pl. 30 figs 11–12.—Described “Aus H. Cuming’s Sammlung”, but not found.
Bulinus erythrostomaSowerby I 1833: 37.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Partula flavescens King in King and Broderip 1831: 342.—“Mus. Brit., nost. [King coll.], Brod.”; not found.
Bulinus granulosus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 31.—Described from “the collection made by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulinus gravesii King in King and Broderip 1831: 340.—“Mus. nost.” [King coll.].
Plekocheilus glaber grenadensisGuppy 1868: 436.—See also Dance 1966: 288.
Bulimus guentheriSowerby III 1892: 296, pl. 23 figs 7–8.—Sowerby wrote “[t]he only specimen I have seen belongs to the National Collection at South Kensington [NHMUK]”, but has not been encountered.
Bulimus guttulaPfeiffer 1854c: 154.—Description based on material “collected by M. Bourcier”, and presumed to be in NHMUK but not found.
Bulimus hegewischiPfeiffer 1842: 46.—Described from “[Mexico] Tenango” and a colour variety from “Michoacan, Pazquaro. (Hegewisch in litt.)”; specimens found in the Cuming collection are labeled “Rio Frio”, and not considered type material.
Bulimus hennahiJ.E. Gray 1828: 5, pl. 5 fig. 5.
Bulimus hyematusReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 49 fig. 324.—Described from “Mus. Cuming”, but not found.
Otostomus (Drymaeus) lilacinus ictericusMartens 1893 [1890–1901]: 202.
Bulimus inaequalisPfeiffer 1857c: 330.—Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”; the material found has no locality label.
Bulinus inflatus Broderip, 1836: 45.—Described from a shell “brought home by Mr. Cuming”, but not encountered in the collection.
Bulimus iostomaSowerby I 1824: 58, pl. 5 fig. 1.
Bulinus janeirensis Sowerby I 1838 [Sowerby I and II 1832–1841]: 8, fig. 97.
Bulimus jucundusPfeiffer 1855b: 290.—Described “from Mr. Cuming’s collection”, but not found.
Bulinus labeoBroderip 1828: 222, suppl. pl. 31.—See also Pain 1959.
Bulinus laurentiiSowerby I 1833: 37.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus lindeniReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 31 fig. 189.—Described from “Mus. Cuming”, but not found.
Helix listeriWood 1828: 22, pl. 7 fig. 23.—“Br.M.” [NHMUK], not found.
Orthalicus macandrewiSowerby III 1889: 398, pl. 25 fig. 18.—Based on a “single specimen”, which is, however, not present in the NHMUK collection.
Bulinus mutabilis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 108—Several lots are present in the General Collection, however, none matching the original data.
Bulimus navarrensisAngas 1878: 73, pl. 5 figs 15–16.—“(Mus. Boucard)”.
Otostomus chiapensis nebulosusMartens 1893 [1890–1901]: 205, pl. 12 fig. 15.—Based on Strebel and Pfeffer (1882).
Bulimulus (Drymaeus) nigroumbilicatusPreston 1907: 491, fig. 6.
Helix orobaenad’Orbigny 1835: 17.— This taxon is marked by Gray (1854: 18) as being absent, thus the material in MNHN is the sole extant.
Bulinus pallidiorSowerby I 1833: 72.—Sowerby wrote “Mr. Cuming obtained two specimens of this species in South America, but without being able to ascertain its locality”. The material found is from the Cuming collection, and has a label “Central America”; since it comprises four specimens it is not considered as type material.
Bulimus pardalisReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 24 fig. 157.—“Mus. Dennison”.
Bulimus peeliiReeve 1859: 123.—This species has been mentioned by Richardson both as Porphyrobaphe (Richardson 1993: 120) and Drymaeus (Richardson 1995: 161); we consider only the latter classification to be correct.
Bulimus pentlandiReeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 83 fig. 614.—“Mus. Hamilton”.
Otostomus attenuatus pittieriMartens 1893 [1890–1901]: 216, pl. 16 fig. 1.—Based on material collected by Pittier (see Angas 1879: 478).
Bulimus primularisReeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 73 fig. 527.—Based on material from “Mus. Cuming”, but not located.
Bulinus princeps Broderip in Sowerby I 1833 [Sowerby I and II 1832–1841]: 6, fig. 18.
Tomigerus principalisSowerby II 1849: 14, pl. 2 figs 6–7.—“In Mr. Cuming’s collection”, but not located.
Bulinus pulchellus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 106.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulinus pulchellus Sowerby I 1838 [Sowerby I and II 1832–1841]: 8, figs 91–92 (not Broderip 1832).
Bulimus rhodacmePfeiffer 1842: 50.—“(Bridges, Cuming)”, but material not located.
Bulinus rubellusBroderip 1832: 124.— Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus rubescensReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 23 fig. 148.—“(Mus. Cuming)”, not found.
Bulimus rupicolusReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 16 fig. 93.—“(Mus. Cuming)”, not found.
Bulimus sarcodesPfeiffer 1846: 30.—Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”; the material was not found.
Bulimus sayiPfeiffer 1847: 114.—Based on material “in the collection of Hugh Cuming”, but not located.
Bulimus scytodesPfeiffer 1853b: 256.—Described from “the collection of Hugh Cuming”; the material was not found.
Bulimus sporadicusReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 49 fig. 325.—“(Mus. Cuming)”, not found.
Bulinus striatulusSowerby I 1833: 73.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulinus striatus ‘King’ Sowerby I 1833 [Sowerby I and II 1832–1841]: 7, fig. 56.
Clausilia? (Balea?) tayloriPfeiffer 1861b: 27, pl. 2 fig. 7.—Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but the material has not been found.
Bulinus tigris Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 107.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Otostomus (Drymaeus) lilacinus undulosusMartens 1893 [1890–1901]: 201.—Based on material collected by Champion, but not found.
Bulinus varians Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 107.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Tomigerus venezuelensisPfeiffer 1856: 36.—Described from “the collection of H. Cuming”, but the material has not been found.
Bulimus venosusReeve 1848 [1848–1850]: pl. 45 fig. 285.—“(Mus. Cuming)”, not found.
Bulimulus (Drymaeus) ventricosusPreston 1907: 495, fig. 10.
Bulinus vexillum Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 105.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Helix vexillumWood 1828: 24, pl. 8 fig. 78a.—“M.Cab.” [Mrs. Mawe’s coll.].
Bulimulus (Drymaeus) vicinusPreston 1907: 495, fig. 11.
Bilinus vittatus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832: 31.—Described from “shells collected by Mr. Cuming”, but not found.
Bulimus ziegleriReeve 1849 [1848–1850]: pl. 58 fig. 389.—“(Mus. Cuming)”.
IV. Addendum to part 2, Bothriembryontidae and Odontostomidae (Breure and Ablett 2012)
Bulimus senilis
Gassies, 1869
Bulimus senilis Gassies 1869: 71.
Placostylus senilis ; Neubeurt et al. 2009: 110, fig. 18 (lectotype designation).
Type locality.
[New Caledonia] “Baie du Sud (Nov. Cal.)” (see remarks).
Label.
“New Caledonia”.
Dimensions.
“Long. 129 mill., diam. maj. 65”. Figured specimen H 126.1, D 56.3, W 7.0.
Type material.
NHMUK 1883.11.10.1179, one paralectotype ex Sowerby ex Gassies.
Remarks.
Neubert et al. (2009) suggested that the type locality may be erroneous as this taxon is only known from Ile des Pins and Koutoumo. See also their discussion on the variation within this species and consider their general remark that this species is “either recently extinct and/or represent morphological variations of extant taxa”. The lectotype selected by Neubert et al. (2009) is MNHN 21367.
Current systematic position.
Bothriembryontidae, Placostylus senilis (Gassies, 1869).
V. Corrigenda to part 2, Bothriembryontidae and Odontostomidae (Breure and Ablett 2012)
p. 3: salomonis (Pfeiffer, 1853) shoud be removed under Placostylus Beck, 1837, and inserted under Santacharis Iredale, 1927.
p. 25: Pupa spixii major d’Orbigny, 1837 under Type material: the lectotype has registration number 1854.12.4.230 instead of 1885.12.4.232. The latter lot is from “Corrientes, Argentina”, while lot 1854.12.4.230 is from “Guarayos, Bolivia”. The specimen figured in Figs 22A–E is actually a paralectotype from this locality; for the lectotype see Figure 30 in this paper.
Figure 30.
i–v Spixia striata (Spix, 1827), lectotype of Pupa spixii major d’Orbigny, 1837 NHMUK 1854.12.4.230 (H = 34.8) v apical whorls (scale line = 5 mm).
p. 30: Bulimus ouensis Gassies, 1870 under Type material: the holotype has registration number 1883.11.10.1176 where it should read 1883.11.10.1167.
VI. Addendum to part 3, Bulimulidae (Breure and Ablett 2014)
Bulimus diaphanus
Pfeiffer, 1855
Bulimus diaphanus Pfeiffer 1855a: 125; Pfeiffer 1859: 505; Breure 1979: 62.
Bulimulus diaphanus ; Pilsbry 1897 [1897–1898]: 47.
Bulimulus (Bulimulus) diaphanus diaphanus ; Breure 1974: 30, pl. III fis 11–12.
Type locality.
“S. Thomas, West Indies (Bland)”.
Dimensions.
“Long. 15, diam. 7 mill.”.
Remarks.
The two specimens mentioned and figured by Breure (1974) have to be considered as lost, as—despite repetitive searches—they could not be re-found during our research.
Bulimulus (Drymaeus) interruptus pallidus
Preston, 1909
Bulimulus (Drymaeus) interruptus var. pallidus Preston 1909: 511, fig. 2.
Type locality.
“Merida, Venezuela”.
Label.
“Merida, Venezuela”.
Dimensions.
Not given. Figured specimen H 23.5, D 11.9, W 4.3+.
Type material.
NHMUK 1914.4.3.41, lectotype (ex Preston).
Remarks.
This varietal name has been treated as unavailable under Art. 45.6 ICZN by Breure and Ablett (2014: 96). Paul Callomon (pers. commun.) has suggested that this should be reconsidered and doubted if a lectotype of the nominal name already existed.
Our opinion is as follows:
Preston undoubtedly had a series of specimens at hand when describing Bulimulus (Drymaeus) interruptus; both the wording “to be greatly variable” and “its principle forms” are indicative of this.
Breure (1979: 120) mentioned this taxon in his listing under Drymaeus (Mesembrinus) Albers, 1850, and stated “HT BMNH 1914.4.3.38” [referring to a single specimen, thus qualifying Art. 74.6.1.2 jo. 74.3]; Art. 74.6 ICZN rules this statement as a lectotype designation. It should be noted, however, that Breure did not list the “var. pallidus” of Preston in his paper (cf. point d below).
Köhler (1997) also concluded that this taxon was described from several specimens but said “A holotype has not been designated. Therefore, the present specimen [ZMB 59597] is a syntype. Consequently, the specimen in the BMNH referred to as holotype by Breure (1979) is a syntype”. Overlooking, as explained in the previous item, the lectotype designation under Art. 74.6 (see previous point).
Reconsidering the (un)availability under Art. 45.6, it is important to note that var. pallidus was proposed before 1961 and has to be treated as subspecific (see the contributions of Steve Lingafelter and Doug Yanega on the Taxacom listing, http://to.ly/zFZO). It may be noted that the only reference to this taxon after Preston’s publication is in Baker (1926: 44), who regarded it as a synonym of Bulimus granadensis Pfeiffer, 1848 (see also Richardson 1995: 133).
While Bulimulus (Drymaeus) interruptus var. pallidus is an available name, we concur with Baker (1926) and Richardson (1995) to consider this taxon as a synonym of the nominal form.
The specimen of var. pallidus in the NHMUK is now designated lectotype (design. n.) to fixate this synonymisation. The text in Breure and Ablett (2014: 96), under ’Type material’, should be corrected as follows: “NHMUK 1914.3.38, lectotype; 1914.4.3.39–40, 42–43, four paralectotypes”.
Current systematic position.
Bulimulidae, Drymaeus (Mesembrinus) interruptus (Preston, 1909).
VII. Corrigenda to part 3, Bulimulidae (Breure and Ablett 2014)
The ’Systematic list of taxa arranged in generic order’ on page 3–7 should be replaced by the following text:
Family Bulimulidae Tryon, 1867
Auris
Spix, 1827
swainsoni Pfeiffer, 1845.
Bostryx
Troschel, 1847 sensu Breure 1979 (see also Breure 2012b)
acalles Pfeiffer, 1853; affinis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; agueroi Weyrauch, 1960; aileenae Breure, 1978; albicans Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; albicolor Morelet, 1863; albus Sowerby I, 1833; andoicus Morelet, 1863; apodemeta d’Orbigny, 1835; atacamensis Pfeiffer, 1856; balsanus Morelet, 1863; cactorum d’Orbigny, 1835; ceratacme Pfeiffer, 1855; cercicolaMorelet 1863; compactus Fulton, 1902; conspersus Sowerby I, 1833; coriaceus Pfeiffer, 1857; costatus Weyrauch, 1960; costifer Weyrauch, 1960; delumbis Reeve, 1849; denickei J.E. Gray, 1852; depstus Reeve, 1849; derelictus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; devians Dohrn, 1863; emaciatus Morelet, 1863; erosus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; ferrugineus Reeve, 1849; glomeratus Weyrauch, 1960; guttatus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; hamiltoni Reeve, 1849; holostoma Pfeiffer, 1846; huascensis Reeve, 1848; infundibulum Pfeiffer, 1853; kathiae Breure, 1978; lactifluus Pfeiffer, 1857; lesueureanus Morelet, 1860; lichnorum d’Orbigny, 1835; limensis Reeve, 1849; limonoica d’Orbigny, 1835; longinquus Morelet, 1863; luridus Pfeiffer, 1863; mejillonensis Pfeiffer, 1857; metagyra Pilsbry & Olsson, 1949; minor Weyrauch, 1960; modestus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; moniezi Dautzenberg, 1896; montagnei d’Orbigny, 1837; mordani Breure, 1978; multispira da Costa, 1904; nanus Reeve, 1849; nigropileatus Reeve, 1849; obliquistriatus da Costa, 1901; orophilus Morelet, 1860; papillatus Morelet, 1860; paposensis Pfeiffer, 1856; paucicostatus Breure, 1978; philippii Pfeiffer, 1842; pictus Pfeiffer, 1855; pruinosus Sowerby I, 1833; pupiformis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; pustulosus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; radiatus Morelet, 1863; reconditus Reeve, 1849; rehderi Weyrauch, 1960; rhodolarynx Reeve, 1849; rodriguezae Weyrauch, 1967; rusticellus Morelet, 1860; scabiosus Sowerby I, 1833; scalaricosta Morelet, 1860; scalariformis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; serotinus Morelet, 1860; simpliculus Pfeiffer, 1855; spiculatus Morelet, 1860; stenacme Pfeiffer, 1857; terebralis Pfeiffer, 1842; torallyi d’Orbigny, 1835; tricinctus Reeve, 1848; tumidulus Pfeiffer, 1842; turritus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; umbilicaris Souleyet, 1842; veruculum Morelet, 1860; vilchezi Weyrauch, 1960; virgultorum Morelet, 1863; voithianus Pfeiffer, 1847; woodwardi Pfeiffer, 1857.
Bulimulus
Leach, 1814
barbadensis Pfeiffer, 1853; cacticolus Reeve, 1849; dysoni Pfeiffer, 1846; effeminatus Reeve, 1848; erectus Reeve 1849; haplochrous Pfeiffer, 1855; heloica d’Orbigny, 1835; ignavus Reeve, 1849; inutilis Reeve, 1850; istapensis Crosse and Fischer, 1873; juvenilis Pfeiffer, 1855; marcidus Pfeiffer, 1853; mollicellus Reeve, 1849; monachus Pfeiffer, 1857; montevidensis Pfeiffer, 1846; nubeculatus Pfeiffer, 1853; pervius Pfeiffer, 1853; pessulatus Reeve, 1848; petenensis Morelet, 1851; pliculatus Pfeiffer, 1857; rubrifasciatus Reeve, 1848; sporadica d’Orbigny, 1835; transparens Reeve, 1849; turritella d’Orbigny, 1835; vesicalis Pfeiffer, 1853.
Drymaeus (Drymaeus)
Albers, 1850
abruptus Rolle, 1904; abscissus Pfeiffer, 1855; abyssorum d’Orbigny, 1835; aequatorianus E.A. Smith, 1877; acervatus Pfeiffer, 1857; acuminatus da Costa, 1906; alabastrinus da Costa, 1906; albolabiatus E.A. Smith, 1877; ambustus Reeve, 1849; angustus da Costa, 1906; antioquiensis Pfeiffer, 1855; arcuatostriatus Pfeiffer, 1855; auris Pfeiffer, 1866; baranguillanus Pfeiffer, 1853; bartletti H. Adams, 1867; bellus da Costa, 1906; bogotensis Pfeiffer, 1855; bolivarii d’Orbigny, 1835; bolivianus Pfeiffer, 1846; boucardi da Costa, 1907; bourcieri Pfeiffer, 1853; brachysoma d’Orbigny, 1835; buckleyi Sowerby III, 1895; canaliculatus Pfeiffer, 1845; castaneostrigatus da Costa, 1906; caucaensis da Costa, 1898; chamaeleon Pfeiffer, 1855; chimborasensis Reeve, 1848; chiriquensis da Costa, 1901; clathratus Pfeiffer, 1858; coarctatus Pfeiffer, 1845; confluens Pfeiffer, 1855; convexus Pfeiffer, 1855; cuticula Pfeiffer, 1855; cuzcoensis Reeve, 1849; dacostae Sowerby III, 1892; dombeyanus Pfeiffer, 1846; dunkeri Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846; elsteri da Costa, 1901; exoticus da Costa, 1901; expatriatus Preston, 1909; fabrefactus Reeve, 1848; fallax Pfeiffer, 1853; farrisi Pfeiffer, 1858; felix Pfeiffer, 1862; fenestratus Pfeiffer, 1846; flexilabris Pfeiffer, 1853; flexuosus Pfeiffer, 1853; fucatus Reeve, 1849; fusoides d’Orbigny, 1835; gealei H. Adams, 1867; geometricus Pfeiffer, 1846; gueinzii Pfeiffer, 1857; hidalgoi da Costa, 1898; humboldtii Reeve, 1849; hygrohylea d’Orbigny, 1835; inclinatus Pfeiffer, 1862; incognitus da Costa, 1907; jansoni Martens, 1893; josephus Angas, 1878; knorri Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846; lamas Higgins, 1868; lattrei Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846; laxostylus Rolle, 1904; lilacinus Reeve, 1849; linostoma d’Orbigny, 1835; lophoica d’Orbigny, 1835; lucidus da Costa, 1898; malleatus da Costa, 1898; marmarina d’Orbigny, 1835; murrinus Reeve, 1848; musivus Pfeiffer, 1855; napo Angas, 1878; notabilis da Costa, 1906; notatus da Costa, 1906; nystianus Pfeiffer, 1853; ochrocheilus E.A. Smith, 1877; orthostoma E.A. Smith, 1877; patricius Reeve, 1849; perenensis da Costa, 1901; pergracilis Rolle, 1904; phryne Pfeiffer, 1863; plicatoliratus da Costa, 1898; poecila d’Orbigny, 1835; ponsonbyi da Costa, 1907; praetextus Reeve, 1849; protractus Pfeiffer, 1855; pseudofusoides da Costa, 1906; pulcherrimus H. Adams, 1867; punctatus da Costa, 1907; quadrifasciatus Angas, 1878; recedens Pfeiffer, 1864; regularis Fulton, 1905; rosenbergi da Costa, 1900; rubrovariegatus Higgins, 1868; saccatus Pfeiffer, 1855; schmidti Pfeiffer, 1854; scitulus Reeve, 1849; scitus H. Adams, 1867; selli Preston, 1909; serratus Pfeiffer, 1855; smithii da Costa, 1898; solidus Preston, 1907; spadiceus da Costa, 1906; spectatus Reeve, 1849; strigatus Sowerby I, 1833; subhybridus da Costa, 1906; subinterruptus Pfeiffer, 1853; subventricosus da Costa, 1901; sykesi da Costa, 1906; tigrinus da Costa, 1898; vespertinus Pfeiffer, 1858; volsus Fulton, 1907; xanthostoma d’Orbigny, 1835; yungasensis d’Orbigny, 1837; zhorquinensis Angas, 1879; ziczac da Costa, 1898; zoographica d’Orbigny, 1835.
Drymaeus (Mesembrinus)
Albers, 1850
aestivus Pfeiffer, 1857; amandus Pfeiffer, 1855; andicola Pfeiffer, 1847; apicepunctata Preston, 1914; apiculata J.E. Gray, 1834; attenuatus Pfeiffer, 1853; aureolus Guppy, 1866; aurifluus Pfeiffer, 1857; broadwayi E.A. Smith, 1896; bugabensis Martens, 1893; californicus Reeve, 1848; cancellata da Costa, 1906; castus Pfeiffer, 1847; championi Martens, 1893; citronellus Angas, 1879; columbiensis Pfeiffer, 1856; conicus da Costa, 1907; demotus Reeve, 1850; depictus Reeve, 1849; deshayesi Pfeiffer, 1845; discrepans Sowerby I, 1833; dubius Pfeiffer, 1853; dutaillyi Pfeiffer, 1857; electrum Reeve, 1848; erubescens Pfeiffer, 1847; feriatus Reeve, 1850; fidustus Reeve, 1849; flavidulus E.A. Smith, 1877; floridanus Pfeiffer, 1857; fuscobasis E.A. Smith, 1877; gabbi Angas, 1879; gruneri Pfeiffer, 1846; hachensis Reeve, 1850; hepatostomus Pfeiffer, 1861; hoffmanni Martens, 1893; hondurasanus Pfeiffer, 1846; hypozonus Martens, 1893; immaculatus C.B. Adams in Reeve, 1850; incarnatus Pfeiffer, 1855; inglorius Reeve, 1848; interruptus Preston, 1909; inusitatus Fulton, 1900; iodostylus Pfeiffer, 1861; jonasi Pferiffer in Philippi, 1846; keppelli Pfeiffer, 1853; koppeli Sowerby III, 1892; laetus Reeve, 1849; lascellianus E.A. Smith, 1895; lirinus Morelet, 1851; lividus Reeve, 1850; loxanus Higgins, 1872; loxensis Pfeiffer, 1846; lucidus Reeve, 1848; lusorius Pfeiffer, 1855; manupictus Reeve, 1848; meridanus Pfeiffer, 1846; monilifer Reeve, 1848; moricandi Pfeiffer, 1847; moritinctus Martens, 1893; mossi E.A. Smith, 1896; moussoni Pfeiffer, 1853; muliebris Reeve, 1849; nigrofasciatus Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846; nitelinus Reeve, 1849; nitidus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; nubilus Preston, 1903; pallidus Preston, 1909; panamensis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; pervariabilis Pfeiffer, 1853; prestoni da Costa, 1906; primula Reeve, 1848; puellaris Reeve, 1850; rawsonis H. Adams, 1873; rectilinearis Pfeiffer, 1855; roseatus Reeve, 1848; signifer Pfeiffer, 1855; sisalensis Morelet, 1849; sowerbyi Pfeiffer, 1847; studeri Pfeiffer, 1847; subpellucidus E.A. Smith, 1877; sulcosus Pfeiffer, 1841; sulphureus Pfeiffer, 1857; tenuilabris Pfeiffer, 1866; translucens Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; trimarianus Martens, 1893; trinitarius E.A. Smith, 1986; tristis Pfeiffer, 1855; tropicalis Morelet, 1849; umbraticus Reeve, 1850; varicosus Pfeiffer, 1853; vincentinus Pfeiffer, 1846; virginalis Pfeiffer, 1856; wintlei Finch, 1929.
Kuschelenia (Kuschelenia)
Hylton Scott, 1951
confusus Reeve, 1848; culminea d’Orbigny, 1835; edwardsi Morelt, 1863; gayi Pfeiffer, 1857; jussieui Pfeiffer, 1846; lithoica d’Orbigny, 1835; thamnoica d’Orbigny, 1835; tupacii d’Orbigny, 1835.
Kuschelenia (Bocourtia)
Rochebrune, 1882 (comb. n.)
Remarks.
David Campbell (pers. commun.) kindly made us aware that the name Vermiculatus Breure, 1978 is preceded by Bocourtia Rochebrune, 1882. Rochebrune (1882: 117) described this genus from Thailand as a member of Lymnaeidae; the type species Bocourtia lymnaeformis Rochebrune, 1882 was subsequently designated by Hubendick (1951: 114), but Ancey (1906: 317) and Germain (1910: C.32) already recognised that this species was identical to Bulimus anthisanensis Pfeiffer, 1853. The name Vermiculatu s Breure, 1978 (type species Bulinus bicolor Sowerby I, 1835) is thus a subjective junior synonym of Bocourtia Rochebrune, 1882 (syn. n.). The following taxa are affected by this new classification (comb. n.):
aequatorius Pfeiffer, 1853; anthisanensis Pfeiffer, 1853; aquilus Reeve, 1848; badius Sowerby I, 1835; bicolor Sowerby I, 1835; caliginosus Reeve, 1849; coagulatus Reeve, 1849; cotopaxiensis Pfeiffer, 1853; filaris Pfeiffer, 1853; nucinus Reeve, 1850; ochraceus Morelet, 1863; peaki Breure, 1978; petiti Pfeiffer, 1846; polymorpha d’Orbigny, 1835; purpuratus Reeve, 1849; quechuarum Crawford, 1939; subfasciatus Pfeiffer, 1853.
Naesiotus
Albers, 1850 sensu Breure 1979
achatellinus Forbes, 1850; albemarlensis Dall, 1917; apertus Pfeiffer, 1855; catlowiae Pfeiffer, 1853; chamayensis Weyrauch, 1967; chemnitzioides Forbes, 1850; cinereus Reeve, 1849; crepundia d’Orbigny, 1835; curtus Reibisch, 1892; darwini Pfeiffer, 1846; dentritis Morelet, 1863; durangoanus Martens 1893; eschariferus Sowerby I, 1838; exornatus Reeve, 1849; fernandezae Weyrauch, 1958; fontainii d’Orbigny, 1838; fourmiersi d’Orbigny, 1837; galapaganus Pfeiffer, 1855; irregularis Pfeiffer, 1848; jacobi Sowerby I, 1833; lycodus Dall, 1917; montivaga d’Orbigny, 1835; munsterii d’Orbigny, 1837; nucula Pfeiffer, 1853; nux Broderip, 1832; orbignyi Pfeiffer, 1846; pallidus Reibisch, 1892; paziana d’Orbigny, 1835; perspectivus Pfeiffer, 1846; phlegonis Dall and Ochsner, 1928; quitensis Pfeiffer, 1848; rimatus Pfeiffer, 1847; rivasii d’Orbigny, 1837; rocayana d’Orbigny, 1835; rugiferus Sowerby I, 1833; rugulosus Sowerby I, 1833; sculpturatus Pfeiffer, 1846; sugillatus Pfeiffer, 1857; terebra Reibisch, 1892; trichoda d’Orbigny, 1835; unifasciatus Sowerby I, 1833; ustulatus Sowerby I, 1833; ventrosus Reibisch, 1892; verrucosus Pfeiffer, 1855; wolfi Reibisch, 1892.
Neopetraeus
Martens, 1885
altoperuvianus Reeve, 1849; atahualpa Dohrn, 1863; binneyanus Pfeiffer, 1857; cora d’Orbigny, 1835; decussatus Reeve, 1849; excoriatus Pfeiffer, 1855; lobbii Reeve, 1849; myristicus Reeve, 1849; patasensis Pfeiffer, 1858; platystomus Pfeiffer, 1858; ptychostylus Pfeiffer, 1858.
Newboldius
Pilsbry, 1932
crichtoni Broderip, 1836; illustris Rolle, 1905.
Protoglyptus
Pilsbry, 1897
martinicensis Pfeiffer, 1846; pilosus Guppy, 1871; sanctaeluciae E.A. Smith, 1889.
Rabdotus
Albers, 1850
juarezi Pfeiffer, 1866; liquabilis Reeve, 1848; ragsdalei Pilsbry, 1890; schiedeanus Pfeiffer, 1841.
Scutalus
Albers, 1850
baroni (Helix) Fulton, 1896; baroni (Bulimulus) Fulton, 1897; chiletensis Weyrauch, 1967; cretaceus Pfeiffer, 1855; grandiventris Weyrauch, 1960; latecolumellaris Preston, 1909; proteus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832; versicolor Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832.
Stenostylus
Pilsbry, 1898
meleagris Pfeiffer, 1853; nigrolimbatus Pfeiffer, 1853.
Nomina inquirenda
clarus Pfeiffer, 1857; dukinfieldi Melvill, 1900; gelidus Reeve, 1849; nivalis d’Orbigny, 1835; pallens Reeve, 1849; sowerbyi Pfeiffer, 1847.
p. 17: Bulimus amandus Pfeiffer, 1855: registration number should read 1975457.
p. 49: Drymaeus conicus da Costa, 1907: registration number for paralectotype should read 1907.11.21.32.
p. 69: Bulinus eschariferus Sowerby I, 1838: Type material should read NHMUK 1975173, five possible syntypes (Cuming coll.).
p. 101: Bulimus jussieui Pfeiffer, 1846: Type material should read NHMUK 1975170, lectotype and one paralectotype (Cuming coll.).
p. 180: Bulimus sisalensis Morelet, 1849: Remarks should read Breure (1979: 123) erroneously mentioned “LT BMNH 1893.2.4.1655”; as the lectotype was already selected in Breure 1975b: 1152, this specimen is now one of the paralectotypes. The current systematic position follows Thompson (2011: 120).
p. 238: Bulimus gruneri Pfeiffer, 1846: figured specimen is not the lectotype but of paralectotype NHMUK 20100563/1.
p. 259, Fig. 45D–F: the figured specimen is not the lectotype but one of the pralectotypes.
VIII. Taxa excluded from the Orthalicoidea.
This is additional to the taxa excluded in the previous papers (Breure and Ablett 2011, 2012, 2014).
Bulimus cucullusMorelet 1849: 9.—Now placed in the family Succineidae.
Bulimulus glandiniformisSowerby III 1892: 297, pl. 23 figs 13–14.— Now placed in the family Subulinidae.
Acknowledgements
This research received support from the SYNTHESYS Project (http://www.synthesys.info) which is financed by European Community Research Infrastructure Action under the FP7 Integrating Activities Programme. For all their help during ASHB’s stay at the National History Museum, he is very much indebted to J. Pickering, Andreia Salvador and Kathie Way of the Mollusca Section. A special word of thanks is due to staff of the NHMUK Photo Unit for handling the many requests for images (P. Crabb, P. Hurst, H. Taylor). Fred Naggs helped us with suggestions for non-Orthalicoid taxa. Paul Callomon and Gary Rosenberg (Philadelphia) commented on our previous paper, which has led us to add a reconsideration of one taxon. David Campbell (Boiling Springs) raised our awareness on a nomenclatural issue. Finally, the comments of Francisco Borrero and an anonymous reviewer has allowed us to improve this paper which concludes this series.
Appendix
List of taxa for which Orthalicoidea types are extant, or discussed, in the NHMUK collection
Remarks. This list has been compiled from I: Amphibulimidae (Breure and Ablett 2011); II: Bothriembryontidae and Odontostomidae (Breure and Ablett 2012); III: Bulimulidae (Breure and Ablett, 2014); IV: Megaspiridae, Orthalicidae, and Simpulopsidae (this paper). A black star (♦) indicates a nomen inquirendum, an asterisk (*) denotes taxa now excluded from the Orthalicoidea, a curved stem sign (¶) is type material not located but previously known to be present; with a dagger (†) taxa are indicated for which type material was expected but not found, and a pilcrow sign (¶) is used for taxa of which material is not (or no longer) considered to be type specimens. Finally, a reference mark (※) indicate the taxa treated otherwise in the text, e.g. as junior or senior synonym.
abruptus Rolle, 1904—III, 7
abscissus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 8
abyssorum d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 9; ※III, 91
acalles Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 9
acervatus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 10
achatellinus Forbes, 1850—III, 10
achilles Pfeiffer, 1853—IV, 5
acuminatus da Costa, 1906—III, 11
adamsonii J.E. Gray, 1834†—IV, 41
adoptus Reeve, 1849—I, 14
aenea Pfeiffer, 1861—IV, 5
aequatorianus E.A. Smith, 1877—III, 11; IV, 50
aequatorius Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 11
aestivus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 12
affinis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—III, 12
agueroi Weyrauch, 1960—III, 13
aileenae Breure, 1978—III, 13
alauda Hupé, 1857—※III, 193
alba Crosse, 1874—II, 5
alba Sowerby I in J.E. Gray and Sowerby I 1839†—IV, 41
alabastrinus da Costa, 1906—III, 14
albemarlensis Dall, 1917—III, 14
albicans Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—III, 15
albicolor Morelet, 1863—III, 15
albolabiatus E.A. Smith, 1877—III, 16
albus Sowerby I, 1833—III, 16
alexander Crosse, 1855—※II, 27
altoperuvianus Reeve, 1849—III, 17
alutaceus Reeve, 1849—IV, 6
amandus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 17; IV, 51
ambagiosus Suter, 1906—※II, 32
ambustus Reeve, 1849—III, 18; ※III, 41
andicola Pfeiffer, 1847—III, 18
andoicus Morelet, 1863—III, 18
angasianus Pfeiffer, 1864—II, 5
angrandianus Pilsbry, 1897♦—※III, 164
angustus da Costa, 1906—III, 19
anthisanensis Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 19; ※III, 186; IV, 50
antioquensis Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 20
apertus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 20
apicepunctata Preston, 1914—III, 21
apiculatus J.E. Gray, 1834—III, 21
apodemeta d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 22; ※III, 148
appendiculata Pfeiffer, 1847—I, 15
approximata Fulton, 1896—IV, 6
aquilus Reeve, 1848—III, 22; IV, 50
arcuatostriatus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 23
ascendens Pfeiffer, 1853—IV, 7
asopeus Gassies, 1871—II, 6
atacamensis Pfeiffer, 1856—III, 23
atahualpa Dohrn, 1863—III, 24
attenuatus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 24
atramentaria Pfeiffer, 1855†—IV, 41
aulacostylus Pfeiffer, 1853†—IV, 41
aureolus Guppy, 1866—III, 25
aurifluus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 25
auriformis da Costa, 1904—I, 16
auris Pfeiffer, 1866—III, 26
aurissciuri Guppy, 1866—I, 16
backhuysi Delsaerdt, 2010—II, 6
badius Sowerby, 1835—III, 26; IV, 50
bairdii Reeve, 1848—II, 6
balsanus Morelet, 1863—III, 27
baranguillanus Pfeiffer, 1853—※III, 20; III, 27
barbadensis Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 28
baroni (Helix) Fulton, 1896—III, 28
baroni (Bulimulus) Fulton, 1897—III, 29
bartletti H. Adams, 1867—III, 29
bellus da Costa, 1906—III, 30
bensoni Reeve, 1849—IV, 7
bicolor Sowerby I, 1835—※III, 27; III, 30; ※III, 155; IV, 50
bifulguratus Reeve, 1849—IV, 8
bilabiatus Broderip and Sowerby I, 1829†—IV, 41
bilineatus Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 41
binneyanus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 31
binominis E.A. Smith, 1895—※III, 106
bivittatus Sowerby I, 1833†—※III, 77; IV, 41
blainvilleanus Pfeiffer, 1848†—IV, 41
blandi Pilsbry, 1897—※III, 30
bogotensis Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 31
bolivarii d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 32
bolivianus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 32
bolivianus Reeve, 1848†—IV, 41
bonariensis Rafinesque, 1833—※III, 124
boucardi da Costa, 1907—III, 33
boucardi Pfeiffer, 1860—IV, 8
bourcieri Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 33
bowkeri Sowerby III, 1890—II, 7
brachysoma d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 34
brazieri Angas, 1871—II, 7
brephoides d’Orbigny, 1835—IV, 9
broadwayi E.A. Smith, 1896—III, 34
broderipii Sowerby I, 1832—II, 8; ※II, 16; ※II, 17; ※II, 35; ※II, 43
bruggeni Breure, 1978—I, 17
brunneum Verdcourt, 1991—II, 8
buckleyi Higgins, 1872—IV, 9
buckleyi Sowerby III, 1895—III, 35
bugabensis Martens, 1893—III, 35
bulbulus Gassies, 1871—II, 9
cacticolus Reeve, 1849—III, 36
cactivorus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—※III, 133; IV, 41
cactorum d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 36
caledonicus Petit de la Saussaye, 1845—※II, 16
californicus Reeve, 1848—III, 37
caliginosus Reeve, 1849—III, 37; IV, 50
calus E.A. Smith, 1891—II, 9
canaliculatus Pfeiffer, 1845—III, 37
cancellata da Costa, 1906—III, 38
cantatus Reeve, 1848†—IV, 41
cardinalis Pfeiffer, 1853†—IV, 41
carinatum Pfeiffer, 1853—II, 10
castaneostrigatus da Costa, 1906—III, 38
castaneus Pfeiffer, 1845—I, 17
castelnaui Pfeiffer, 1857†—IV, 41
castrensis Pfeiffer, 1847†—IV, 41
castus Pfeiffer, 1847—III, 39
catharinae Pfeiffer, 1857—II, 10
cathcartiae Reeve, 1848—I, 17
catlowiae Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 39
caucaensis da Costa, 1898—III, 40
ceratacme Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 40
cercicola Morelet, 1863—III, 40
chacoensis Preston, 1907†—IV, 41
chamaeleon Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 41
chamayensis Weyrauch, 1967—III, 41
championi Martens, 1893—III, 42
charpentieri Pfeiffer, 1850—II, 10
chemnitzioides Forbes, 1850—III, 42
chiletensis Weyrauch, 1967—III, 43
chimborasensis Reeve, 1848—III, 43
chiriquensis da Costa, 1901—III, 43
chrysostoma Moricand, 1836—※III, 190
cinereus Reeve, 1849—III, 44
citrinovitrea Moricand, 1836—※IV, 24
citronellus Angas, 1879—III, 44
clarus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 45
clathratus Pfeiffer, 1858—III, 45
clouei Pfeiffer, 1857—IV, 10
coagulatus Reeve, 1849—III, 46; IV, 50
coarctatus Pfeiffer, 1845—III, 46
coerulescens Pfeiffer, 1858†—IV, 41
coloratus Nyst, 1845※—I, 23
columbianus Lea, 1838—※III, 84; ※III, 86
columbiensis Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 47
columellaris Reeve, 1849†—IV, 41
compactus Fulton, 1902—III, 47
confinus Reeve, 1850†—IV, 41
confluens Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 48
confusus Reeve, 1848—III, 48
conicus da Costa, 1907—III, 49; IV, 51
coniformis Pfeiffer, 1847†—IV, 41
consimilis Reeve, 1848—IV, 10
conspersus Sowerby I, 1833—III, 49
constrictus Pfeiffer, 1841—※IV, 18
constrictus Reeve, 1848†—IV, #42
contortuplicatus Reeve, 1850†—IV, 42
convexus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 50; ※III, 153
coquimbensis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 42
cora d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 50
corderoi Klappenbach, 1958—II, 11
coriaceus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 51
corneus Sowerby I, 1833†—※III, 135; IV, 42
corpulentus Gassies, 1871—II, 11
corrugatus Guppy, 1866—IV, 10
corrugatus King in King and Broderip 1831†—IV, 42
corticosus Sowerby III, 1895—I, 18
costatus Pfeiffer, 1848—II, 12
costatus Weyrauch, 1960—III, 51
costifer Weyrauch, 1960—III, 51
cotopaxiensis Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 52; IV, 50
coturnix Sowerby I, 1832—II, 12
crassilabrum Garrett, 1872—II, 12
crepundia d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 52
cretaceus Pfeiffer, 1855—※III, 29; III, 53
crichtoni Broderip, 1836—III, 54; ※III, 93
cucullus Morelet, 1849*—IV, 51
culminea d’Orbigny, 1835—※III, 49; III, 54; ※III, 101; ※III, 111
cumingi Pfeiffer, 1861—IV, 11
cumingii ‘Newcomb’ Pfeiffer, 1849—II, 13
cuninculinsulae Cox, 1872—II, 13
curianianus Reeve, 1849†—IV, 42
curtus Reibisch, 1892—III, 55
cuticula Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 55
cuzcoensis Reeve, 1849—III, 56
cylindricus Fulton, 1907—II, 14
dacostae Sowerby III, 1892—III, 56
darwini Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 56
dealbatus Say, 1821—※III, 110; ※III, 165
deburghiae Reeve, 1859—IV, 12; ※IV, 16
decoloratus Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 42
decussata Pfeiffer, 1856—IV, 12
decussatus Reeve, 1849—III, 57; ※III, 130
dejectus Fulton, 1907♦—IV, 38
delumbis Reeve, 1849—III, 57
demerarensis Pfeiffer, 1861—IV, 13
demotus Reeve, 1850—III, 58
denickei J.E. Gray, 1852—III, 58
dennisoni Reeve, 1848¶—IV, 39
dentata Wood, 1828—II, 14
dentritis Morelet, 1863—III, 59
depictus Reeve, 1849—III, 59
depstus Reeve, 1849—III, 60
derelictus Broderip, 1832—III, 60
deshayesi Pfeiffer, 1845—III, 61
devians Dohrn, 1863—III, 61
diaphanus Pfeiffer, 1855¶—IV, 45
dillwynianus Pfeiffer, 1853—I, 18
discrepans Sowerby I, 1833—III, 62
dissimulans Preston, 1909—I, 19
doliarius da Costa, 1898—I, 19
dombeyanus ‘Férussac’ Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 62
draparnaudi Pfeiffer, 1847†—IV, 42
droueti Pfeiffer, 1857†—IV, 42
dubius Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 62
dukinfieldi Melvill, 1900♦—III, 63
dunkeri Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 64
durangoanus Martens, 1893—III, 64
dutaillyi Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 65
dux Pfeiffer, 1861—II, 15
dysoni Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 65
eddystonensis Pfeiffer, 1855—II, 15
edwardsi Morelet, 1863—III, 65
edwardsianus Gassies, 1863—II, 16
effeminatus Reeve, 1848—III, 66
eganus Pfeiffer, 1853†—IV, 42
elaeodes Pfeiffer, 1853—I, 46
elata Gould, 1847—IV, 13
electrum Reeve, 1848—III, 66
elegans Pfeiffer, 1842—II, 16
elongata d’Orbigny, 1837—II, 17
elongatus Röding, 1789—※III, 22
elsteri da Costa, 1901—III, 67
emaciatus Morelet, 1863—III, 67
emeus Say, 1830—※III, 92
ephippium Ancey, 1904—IV, 14
episcopalis Pfeiffer, 1855—I, 20
erectus Reeve, 1849—III, 68
eros Angas, 1878—I, 20
erosus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—III, 68
erubescens Pfeiffer, 1847—III, 69
erythrostoma Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 42
eschariferus Sowerby I, 1838—III, 69; IV, 51
euryomphalus Jonas, 1844※—I, 27
excoriatus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 70
exornatus Reeve, 1849—III, 70
exoticus da Costa, 1901—III, 70
expansus Pfeiffer, 1848—※III, 177
expatriatus Preston, 1909—III, 71
fabrefactus Reeve, 1848—III, 71
falcicula Gassies, 1871—II, 17
fallax Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 72
farrisi Pfeiffer, 1858—III, 72
felix Pfeiffer, 1862—III, 73; IV, 51
fenestratus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 73
fenestrellus Martens, 1864—※III, 82
feriatus Reeve, 1848—III, 74
fernandezae Weyrauch, 1958—III, 74
ferrugineus Reeve, 1849—III, 75
fibratus Martyn, 1784—※II, 6; ※II, 7; ※II, 8; ※II, 17; ※II, 30; ※II,41
fidustus Reeve, 1849—III, 75
filaris Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 76; IV, 50
flavescens King in King and Broderip 1831†—IV, 42
flavidulus E.A. Smith, 1877—III, 76
flexilabris Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 76
flexuosus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 77
floridanus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 77
fontainii d’Orbigny, 1838—III, 78
fourmiersi d’Orbigny, 1837—III, 78
foveolatus Pfeiffer, 1848—IV, 14
foxi Clench, 1950—II, 18
fraseri Pfeiffer, 1858—IV, 15
fucatus Reeve, 1849—III, 79
fuligineus Pfeiffer, 1853—II, 18
funckii Nyst, 1843—※I, 14
fuscagula d’Orbigny, 1837—II, 19
fuscobasis E.A. Smith, 1877—III, 79
fuscus Guilding, 1828—※III, 28
fusiformis Menke, 1828—※II, 10
fusoides d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 80
gabbi Angas, 1879—III, 80
galapaganus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 81
gargantua Férussac, 1821—※II, 30
gatopensis Crosse, 1870—II, 19
gayi Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 81; ※III, 193
gealei H. Adams, 1867—III, 82
gelidus Reeve, 1849♦—III, 82
geometricus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 83
glandiniformis Sowerby III, 1892*—IV, 51
glomeratus Weyrauch, 1960—III, 83
gloriosus Pfeiffer, 1862—IV, 15
gomesae da Silva & Thomé, 2006—IV, 16
goroensis Souverbie, 1870—※II, 20
gracilis E.A. Smith, 1902—IV, 16
grammica Crosse, 1870—II, 20
granadensis Pfeiffer, 1848—※III, 58; ※III, 93; ※III, 112
grandiventris Weyrauch, 1960—III, 84
granulosus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 42
gravesii King in King and Broderip 1831†—IV, 42
grayanus Pfeiffer, 1845—II, 20
grenadensis Guppy, 1868†—IV, 42
gruneri Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 84
guadalupensis Bruguière, 1789—※III, 171
guarani d’Orbigny, 1835—II, 20
gueinzii Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 85
guentheri Sowerby III, 1892†—IV, 42
guerini Pfeiffer, 1846—I, 21
guestieri Gassies, 1869—※II, 19; ※II, 22; ※II, 32
guppyi E.A. Smith, 1891—II, 21
guttatus Broderip, 1832—III, 85
guttula Pfeiffer, 1854†—IV, 42
haasi Weyrauch, 1960—※III, 121
habeli Dall, 1892—※III, 191
hachensis Reeve, 1850—III, 86
hamiltoni Reeve, 1849—III, 86
haplochrous Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 87
hargravesi Cox, 1871—II, 21
hartwegi Pfeiffer, 1846—IV, 17
hegewischi Pfeiffer, 1842†—IV, 42
heloica d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 87
hennahi J.E. Gray, 1828†—※III, 36; IV, 42
hepatostomus Pfeiffer, 1861—III, 88
hidalgoi da Costa, 1898—III, 88
hoffmanni Martens, 1893—※III, 38
holostoma Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 89
hondurasanus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 89
huascensis Reeve, 1848—III, 90
humboldtii Reeve, 1849—III, 90
hyaloideus Pfeiffer, 1855—IV, 17
hyematus Reeve, 1848†—IV, 42
hygrohylaea d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 91
hypozonus Martens, 1893—III, 91
ictericus Martens, 1893†—IV, 42
ignavus Reeve, 1849—III, 92
illustris Rolle, 1904—III, 92
imeldae Weyrauch, 1958—※III, 54
immaculatus C.B. Adams in Reeve, 1850—III, 93
imperfectus Guppy, 1866—※III, 197
inca d’Orbigny, 1835—IV, 18
inaequalis Pfeiffer, 1857†—IV, 42
incarnatus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 93
inclinatus Pfeiffer, 1862—III, 94
incognita da Costa, 1907—III, 94
incrassatus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 94
indentatus da Costa, 1901—IV, 18
inermis Morelet, 1851*—III, 214
inflatus Broderip, 1836†—IV, 42
infundibulum Gassies, 1871—II, 22
infundibulum Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 95
inglorius Reeve, 1848—III, 95
insolitus Preston, 1909—IV, 19
integer Pfeiffer, 1855—IV, 19
interruptus Preston, 1909—III, 96; ※IV, 42
inusitatus Fulton, 1900—III, 96
inutilis Reeve, 1850—III, 97
iodostylus Pfeiffer, 1861—III, 97
iostoma Sowerby I, 1824†—IV, 43
iris Pfeiffer, 1853—IV, 20
irregularis Pfeiffer, 1848—III, 98
irroratus Reeve, 1849—IV, 20
ischnus Pilsbry, 1902—※III, 192
istapensis Crosse & Fischer, 1873—III, 98
jacobi Sowerby I, 1833—III, 99; ※III, 142
janeirensis Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 43
jansoni Martens, 1893—III, 99
jeffreysi Pfeiffer, 1852—IV, 21
jonasi Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 100
josephus Angas, 1878—III, 100
juarezi Pfeiffer, 1866—III, 101
jubeus Fulton, 1908—I, 21
jucundus Pfeiffer, 1855†—IV, 43
jussieui Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 101; IV, 51
juvenilis Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 102
kathiae Breure, 1978—III, 102
kelletti Reeve, 1850—IV, 21
keppelli Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 102
kingii J.E. Gray, 1825—II, 22
knorri Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846—III, 103
koppeli Sowerby III, 1892—III, 103
koroensis Garrett, 1872—II, 23
kreftii Cox, 1872—II, 23
labeo Broderip, 1828†—IV, 43
labeo Reeve, 1848—※IV, 35
lacerta Pfeiffer, 1855—I, 22
lactifluus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 104
laetus Reeve, 1849—III, 104
lamarckianus Pfeiffer, 1848—I, 23
lamas Higgins, 1868—III, 105
largillierti Philippi, 1842—※IV, 10
lascellianus E.A. Smith, 1895—III, 105
latecolumellaris Preston, 1909—III, 106
latilabris Pfeiffer, 1855—I, 23
lattrei Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846—III, 106
laurentii Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 43
laxostylus Rolle, 1904—III, 107
leeuwinensis E.A. Smith, 1894—II, 24
lesueureanus Morelet, 1860—III, 107
lichnorum d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 108
lilacinus Reeve, 1849—III, 108; ※III, 144
limensis Reeve, 1849—III, 109
limonoica d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 109
lindeni Reeve, 1848†—IV, 43
linostoma d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 110
linterae Sowerby III, 1890—I, 24
liquabilis Reeve, 1848—III, 110
lirinus Morelet, 1851—III, 111
listeri Wood, 1828†—IV, 43
lithoica d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 111
lividus Reeve, 1850—III, 112
lobbii Reeve, 1849—III, 112; ※III, 159
longinquus Morelet, 1863—III, 112
longulus ‘Behn’ Pfeiffer, 1859—II, 24
lophoica d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 113
loveni Pfeiffer, 1848—I, 24
loxanus Higgins, 1872—¶III, 113
loxensis Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 114
loxostomus Pfeiffer, 1853—IV, 22
lucidus da Costa, 1898—III, 114
lucidus Reeve, 1848—III, 115
luridus Pfeiffer, 1863—III, 115
lusorius Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 116
lycodus Dall, 1917—III, 116
macandrewi Sowerby III, 1889†—IV, 43
macgillivrayi Pfeiffer, 1855—II, 25
magnifica Pfeiffer, 1848—IV, 22
magnificus Grateloup, 1839—IV, 23
mahogany Pfeiffer, 1841—※IV, 14
major d’Orbigny, 1837—II, 25; IV, 45
malleatus da Costa, 1898—III, 117
manupictus Reeve, 1848—III, 117
marcidus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 117
marmarina d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 118
marmatensis Pfeiffer, 1855—IV, 24
marmoratus Dunker in Philippi, 1844—I, 25
martinicensis Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 118
mars Pfeiffer, 1861—IV, 24
mejillonensis Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 119
meleagris Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 119
melo Quoy and Gaimard, 1832—※II, 31
meobambensis Pfeiffer, 1855—IV, 25
meridanus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 120
metagyra Pilsbry & Olsson, 1949—III, 120
mexicanus Lamarck, 1822—※III, 90
miersi Pfeiffer, 1856—IV, 25
miliola d’Orbigny, 1835¶—IV, 39
miltocheilus Reeve, 1848—II, 26
minor d’Orbigny, 1837—II, 26
minor Weyrauch, 1960—III, 121
modestus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—※III, 109; III, 121; ※III, 150
mollicellus Reeve, 1849—III, 121
monachus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 122
moniezi Dautzenberg, 1896—III, 122
monilifer Reeve, 1848—III, 123
montagnei d’Orbigny, 1837—III, 123
montevidensis Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 124
montivaga d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 124
mordani Breure, 1978—III, 125
moricandi Pfeiffer, 1847—III, 125
moritinctus Martens, 1893—III, 126
mossi E.A. Smith, 1896—III, 126
moussoni Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 127
muliebris Reeve, 1849—III, 127
multilineatus Say, 1825—※III, 180
multispira da Costa, 1904—III, 128
munsterii d’Orbigny, 1837—III, 128
murrea Reeve, 1849—IV, 26
murrinus Reeve, 1848—III, 129; ※III, 151
musivus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 129
mutabilis Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 43
myristicus Reeve, 1849—III, 130
nanus Reeve, 1849—III, 130
napo Angas, 1878—III, 130
navarrensis Angas, 1878†—IV, 43
nebulosus Martens, 1893†—IV, 43
necouensis Gassies, 1871—II, 27
neglectus Pfeiffer, 1847—II, 27; ※II, 28
nigrofasciatus Pfeiffer in Philippi, 1846—III, 131
nigrolimbatus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 132
nigropileatus Reeve, 1849—※III, 27; III, 132; ※III, 166
nigroumbilicatus Preston, 1907†—IV, 43
nitelinus Reeve, 1849—III, 132
nitidus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—III, 133
nivalis d’Orbigny, 1835♦—III, 134
niveus Preston, 1909—IV, 26
notabilis da Costa, 1906—III, 134
notatus da Costa, 1906—III, 134
nubeculatus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 135
nubilus Preston, 1903—III, 135
nucinus Reeve, 1850—III, 136; IV, 50
nucula Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 136
nuptialis Melvill & Ponsonby, 1894—II, 28
nux Broderip, 1832—※III, 95; III, 137; ※III, 204
nystianus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 137
obliquistriatus da Costa, 1901—III, 138
obliquus Reeve, 1849—※IV, 21; IV, 26
oblitus Reeve, 1848—II, 28
occultus Reeve, 1849—II, 28; ※II, 31
ochraceus Morelet, 1863—III, 138; IV, 50
ochrocheilus E.A. Smith, 1877—III, 139
ochrostoma Garrett, 1872—II, 29
odontostoma Sowerby I, 1824—II, 29
onager Reeve, 1848—※IV, 34
onca d’Orbigny, 1835—I, 25
opalinus Sowerby I, 1833—IV, 27
orbignyi Pfeiffer, 1846—※III, 21; III, 139
oreades d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 140
orobaena d’Orbigny, 1835¶—IV, 43
orophilus Morelet, 1860—※III, 15; ※III, 41; ※III, 108; III, 140
orthostoma E.A. Smith, 1877—III, 141
otostomus Pfeiffer, 1855—I, 27
ouensis Gassies, 1870—II, 30, IV, 45
ouveanus Dotzauer in Mousson, 1869—※II, 5; ※II, 39
ovulum Reeve, 1849—IV, 27
pallens Reeve, 1849♦—III, 141
pallidior Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 43
pallidus Preston, 1909—IV, 46
pallidus Reibisch, 1892—III, 142
panamensis Broderip, 1832—III, 142
papillatus Morelet, 1860—III, 143
paposensis Pfeiffer, 1856—III, 143
parallelus Pfeiffer, 1857—II, 30
pardalina Guppy, 1868—I, 27
pardalis Reeve, 1848†—IV, 43
patagonica d’Orbigny, 1835—II, 31
patasensis Pfeiffer, 1858—III, 144
patricius Reeve, 1849—III, 144
paucicostatus Breure, 1978—III, 144
paziana d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 145
peaki Breure, 1978—III, 145; IV, 50
peelii Reeve, 1859†—IV, 43
pentadinus d’Orbigny, 1835—※I, 26
pentlandi Reeve 1849†—IV, 43
perdix Pfeiffer, 1848—I, 27
perenensis da Costa, 1901—III, 146
pergracilis Rolle, 1904—III, 146
perlucidus Spix, 1827—※IV, 27
perspectivus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 147
pertristis Pfeiffer, 1855—※III, 197
pervariabilis Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 147
pervius Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 148
pessulatus Reeve, 1848—III, 148
petenensis Morelet, 1851—III, 149
petiti Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 149
philippii Pfeiffer, 1842—III, 150
phlegonis Dall & Ochsner, 1928—III, 150
phlogera d’Orbigny, 1835—IV, 28
phoebus Pfeiffer, 1863—IV, 28
phryne Pfeiffer, 1863—III, 151
physoides Reeve, 1849—II, 31
pictus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 151
pilosus Guppy, 1871—III, 151
pinicola Gassies, 1870—II, 32
piperitus Sowerby I, 1837—I, 28
pittieri Martens, 1893†—IV, 43
platystomus Pfeiffer, 1858—III, 152
plectostylus Pfeiffer, 1848—I, 30
plicatoliratus da Costa, 1898—III, 152
pliculatus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 153
plumbeus Pfeiffer, 1855—IV, 29
poecila d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 153
polymorpha d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 154; IV, 50
ponsonbyi da Costa, 1907—III, 155
porphyrius Pfeiffer, 1847—IV, 30
porphyrostomus Pfeiffer, 1851—※II, 39
powisiana Petit de la Saussaye, 1843—※IV, 43
praetextus Reeve, 1849—III, 155
prestoni da Costa, 1906—III, 156
primula Reeve, 1848—III, 156
primularis Reeve, 1849†—IV, 43
princeps Breoderip in Sowerby I 1833†—IV, 43
principalis Sowerby II, 1849†—IV, 43
priscus Powell, 1938—II, 32
progastor d’Orbigny, 1835¶—IV, 40
proteus Broderip, 1832—III, 157
protractus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 157
pruinosus Sowerby I, 1833—III, 158
pseudofusoides da Costa, 1906—III, 158
ptychostylus Pfeiffer, 1858—III, 159
puellaris Reeve, 1850—III, 159
pulchellus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 43
pulchellus Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 43
pulcherrimus H. Adams, 1867—III, 160
pulicarius Reeve, 1848—I, 31
pumilio Rehder, 1945—※III, 130
punctatus da Costa, 1907—III, 160
punctulifer Sowerby I, 1833—II, 33
pupiformis Broderip, 1832—III, 161
purpuratus Reeve, 1849—III, 161; IV, 50
pustulosus Broderip, 1832—III, 162
pygmeus Weyrauch, 1960—※III, 51
pyrostomus Pfeiffer, 1860—II, 33
quadingensis Connolly, 1929—II, 34
quadrifasciatus Angas, 1878—※III, 131; III, 162
quadricolor Pfeiffer, 1848—I, 31
quechuarum Crawford, 1939—III, 163; IV, 50
quitensis Pfeiffer, 1848—※III, 39; ※III, 98; III, 163
radiatus Morelet, 1863—III, 164
ragsdalei Pilsbry, 1890—III, 164
ramagei E.A. Smith, 1890—II, 34
rawsonis H. Adams, 1873—III, 165
recedens Pfeiffer, 1864—III, 165
recluzianus Pfeiffer, 1847—※III, 135
reconditus Reeve, 1849—III, 166
rectilinearis Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 166
reflexa Pfeiffer, 1842—II, 34
regularis Fulton, 1905—III, 167
rehderi Weyrauch, 1960—III, 167
requieni Pfeiffer, 1853—IV, 30
revinctus Hupé, 1857—※III, 193
rhodacme Pfeiffer, 1842†—IV, 43
rhodinostoma d’Orbigny, 1835—II, 35
rhodocheilus Reeve, 1848—I, 34
rhodolarynx Reeve, 1849—III, 167
rhodostomus J.E. Gray, 1834—II, 35
ridleyi E.A. Smith, 1890—II, 36
rimatus Pfeiffer, 1847—III, 168
rivasii d’Orbigny, 1837—III, 168; ※III, 188
rocayana d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 169
rodriguezae Weyrauch, 1967—III, 169
roseatus Reeve, 1848—III, 170
rosenbergi da Costa, 1906—III, 170
roseolabrum E.A. Smith, 1877—I, 36
rubellus Broderip, 1832†—IV, 44
rubescens Reeve, 1848†—IV, 44
rubrifasciatus Reeve, 1848—III, 171
rubrovariegatus Higgins, 1868—III, 171
rufescens J.E. Gray, 1825—※III, 69
rufovirens Moricand, 1846—※IV, 31
rugiferus Sowerby I, 1833—III, 171
rugulosus Sowerby I, 1833—III, 172
rupicolus Reeve, 1848†—IV, 44
rusticellus Morelet, 1860—III, 172
saccatus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 173
salomonia Pfeiffer, 1853—IV, 31
salomonis Pfeiffer, 1853—※II, 33; II, 36; IV, 45
salteri Sowerby III, 1890—IV, 31
sanchristovalensis Cox, 1870—II, 37
sanctaeluciae E.A. Smith, 1889—III, 173
sarcochilus Pfeiffer, 1857—IV, 32
sarcodes Pfeiffer, 1846†—IV, 44
saturnus Pfeiffer, 1860—IV, 33
savesi Crosse, 1886—II, 37
sayi Pfeiffer, 1847†—IV, 44
scabiosus Sowerby I, 1833—III, 174
scalaricosta Morelet, 1860—III, 174
scalariformis Broderip, 1832—III, 175
schiedeanus Pfeiffer, 1841—III, 175
schmidti Pfeiffer, 1854—III, 176
scytodes Pfeiffer, 1853†—IV, 44
scitulus Reeve, 1849—III, 176
scitus H. Adams, 1867—III, 176
sculpturatus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 177
scytodes Pfeiffer, 1853—I, 37
sellersi Cox, 1872—II, 38
selli Preston, 1909—III, 177
senilis Gassies, 1869—IV, 44
serotinus Morelet, 1860—III, 178
serparastrus Say, 1830—※III, 133
serratus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 178
signifer Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 179
simpliculus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 179
simulus Morelet, 1851—IV, 33
singularis Morelet, 1857—II, 38
sinistrorsa Crosse, 1884—II, 39
sisalensis Morelet, 1849—III, 180; IV, 51
smithii da Costa, 1898—III, 180
solidus Preston, 1907—III, 181
souvillei Morelet, 1857—II, 39
sowerbyi Pfeiffer, 1847♦—III, 181
spadiceus da Costa, 1906—III, 182
speciosus Pfeiffer, 1854—I, 38
spectatus Reeve, 1849—III, 182
spenceri Tate, 1894—II, 40
spiculatus Morelet, 1860—III, 183
sporadica d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 183
sporadicus Reeve, 1848†—IV, 44
stenacme Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 184
stramineus Guilding, 1824—※III, 115
strangei Pfeiffer, 1855—II, 40
striata Spix, 1827—※II, 26
striatulus Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 44
striatus ‘King’ Sowerby I, 1833†—IV, 44
strigatus Sowerby I, 1833—※III, 129; ※III, 173; III, 185
studeri Pfeiffer, 1847—※III, 156; III, 185
subfasciatus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 186; IV, 50
subhybridus da Costa, 1906—III, 186
subinterruptus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 187
subirroratus da Costa, 1898—IV, 34
subpellucidus E.A. Smith, 1877—III, 187
subroseus Fulton, 1915—II, 41
subtuszonatus Pilsbry, 1899—IV, 34
subventricosus da Costa, 1901—III, 188
succineoides Petit de la Saussaye, 1840—※I, 24
sufflatus Gould, 1859—※III, 101
sugillatus Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 188
sulcosus Pfeiffer, 1841—III, 188
sulphureus Pfeiffer, 1857—※III, 45; III, 189
superfasciatus Gassies, 1871—II, 41
superstriatus Sowerby III, 1890—I, 40
swainsoni Pfeiffer, 1845—III, 189
sykesi da Costa, 1906—III, 190
taquinensis Pfeiffer, 1855—I, 41
tasmanicus Pfeiffer, 1853—II, 41
taunaisii Férussac, 1822—※IV, 5
taylori Pfeiffer, 1861†—IV, 44
taylorianus Reeve, 1849—I, 42
tenuilabris Pfeiffer, 1866—III, 190
terebra Reibisch, 1892—III, 191
terebralis Pfeiffer, 1842—III, 191
thamnoica d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 192
thompsonii Pfeiffer, 1845—IV, 35
tigrinus da Costa, 1898—III, 193
tigris Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 44
toleratus Fulton, 1903—II, 42
torallyi d’Orbigny, 1835—※III, 128; III, 194
translucens Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—III, 194
transparens Reeve, 1849—III, 195
trichoda d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 195
tricinctus Reeve, 1848—III, 196
trigonostomus Jonas, 1844—※III, 103
trimarianus Martens, 1893—III, 196
trinitarius E.A. Smith, 1896—III, 197
tristis Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 197
tropicalis Morelet, 1849—III, 198
trujillensis Philippi, 1867—※III, 105
tumidulus Pfeiffer, 1842—III, 198
tupacii d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 199
turbinatus Pfeiffer, 1845—II, 42
turneri Pfeiffer, 1860—II, 43
turritella d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 199
turritellatus Beck, 1838—※III, 200
turritus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—III, 200
umbilicaris Souleyet, 1842—III, 200
umbraticus Reeve, 1850—※III, 77
umbricatus Reeve, 1849—III, 201
undulosus Martens, 1893†—IV, 44
unicolor Sowerby I, 1833—※III, 92; ※III, 98; ※III, 149
unifasciatus Sowerby I, 1833—III, 202
ustulatus Sowerby I, 1833—※III, 150; III, 202
varians Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 44
varicosus Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 203
variegata Pfeiffer, 1842—II, 43
venezuelensis Pfeiffer, 1856†—IV, 44
venosus Reeve, 1848†—IV, 44
ventricosus Preston, 1907†—IV, 44
ventrosus Reibisch, 1892—III, 203
veranyi Pfeiffer, 1848—※I, 38; I, 44
verrucosus Pfeiffer, 1855—III, 203
versicolor Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832—※III, 46; III, 204
veruculum Morelet, 1860—III, 204
vesicalis Pfeiffer, 1853—III, 205
vespertinus Pfeiffer, 1858—III, 205
vexillum Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 44
vexillum Wood, 1828†—※III, 103; IV, 44
vicaria Fulton, 1896—IV, 35
vicinus Preston, 1907†—IV, 44
victor Pfeiffer, 1854—IV, 36
vilchezi Weyrauch, 1960—III, 206
vincentina E.A. Smith, 1895—IV, 37
vincentinus Pfeiffer, 1846—III, 206
virginalis Pfeiffer, 1856—III, 207
virgultorum Morelet, 1863—III, 207
vitrinoides Reeve, 1848¶—IV, 40
vittatus Broderip in Broderip and Sowerby I 1832†—IV, 44
voithianus Pfeiffer, 1847—III, 208
volsus Fulton, 1907—III, 208
wintlei Finch, 1929—III, 209
wolfi Reibisch, 1892—III, 209
woodwardi Pfeiffer, 1857—III, 210
xanthostoma d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 210
yanamensis Morelet, 1863—IV, 37
yatesi Pfeiffer, 1855—※IV, 36; IV, 38
yungasensis d’Orbigny, 1837—III, 211
zhorquinensis Angas, 1879—III, 211
ziczac da Costa, 1898—III, 212
ziegleri Pfeiffer, 1847—※III, 37; ¶III, 212
ziegleri Reeve, 1849†—IV, 44
zilchi Breure, 1977—I, 45
zilchi Weyrauch, 1958—※III, 83
zoographica d’Orbigny, 1835—III, 213
Citation
Breure ASH, Ablett JD (2015) Annotated type catalogue of the Megaspiridae, Orthalicidae, and Simpulopsidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Orthalicoidea) in the Natural History Museum, London. ZooKeys 470: 17–143. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.470.8548
Plates
References
- Ancey CF. (1904) New land shells from South America. The Nautilus 17: 102–104. [Google Scholar]
- Ancey CF. (1906) Notes critiques et synonimiques (suite). Journal de Conchyliologie 53: 310–327. [Google Scholar]
- Angas CF. (1878) Descriptions of seven new species of land-shells recently collected in Costa Rica by Mr. Adolphe Boucard. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1878): 72–74.
- Angas CF. (1879) On the terrestrial Mollusca collected in Costa Rica by the late Dr. W.M. Gabb, with descriptions of new species. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1879): 475–486.
- Baker HB. (1926) The Mollusca collected by the University of Michigan-Williamson expedition in Venezuela, IV. Occasional Papers of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan 167: 1–49. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH. (1973) Index to the neotropical land Mollusca described by Alcide d’Orbigny, with notes on the localities of the mainland species. Basteria 37: 113–135. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH. (1975) Types of Bulimulidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda) in the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris. Bulletin du Muséum national d’Historie naturelle Paris (3) 31, Zoologie233: 1137–1187. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH. (1976) Types of Bulimulidae (Gastropoda, Euthyneura) in the Zoologisches Museum, Universität Zürich. In: Malacologische opstellen ter gelegenheid van het tienjarig bestaan van de malacologische contactgroep ‘Amsterdam en omstreken De Kreukel’. Backhuys, Rotterdam, 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH. (1978) Notes on and descriptions of Bulimulidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda). Zoologische Verhandelingen Leiden 164: 1–255. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH. (1979) Systematics, phylogeny and zoogeography of Bulimulinae (Mollusca). Zoologische Verhandelingen Leiden 168: 1–215. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH. (2011) Annotated type catalogue of the Orthalicoidea (Mollusca, Gastropoda) in the Royal Belgian Institute of Sciences, Brussels, with descriptions of two new species. ZooKeys 101: 1–50. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.101.1133 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Ablett JD. (2011) Annotated type catalogue of the Amphibulimidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Orthalicoidea) in the Natural History Museum, London. ZooKeys 138: 1–52. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.138.1847 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Ablett JD. (2012) Annotated type catalogue of the Bothriembryontidae and Odontostomidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Orthalicoidea) in the Natural History Museum, London. ZooKeys 182: 1–70. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.182.2720 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Ablett JD. (2014) Annotated type catalogue of the Bulimulidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Orthalicoidea) in the Natural History Museum, London. ZooKeys 392: 1–367. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.392.6328 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Álvarez Lajonchère L, González Guillén A. (2014) Color-full and eye-catching: an iconography of Liguus land shells (Gastropoda, Orthalicidae). Archiv für Molluskenkunde 143: 1–19. doi: 10.1127/arch.moll/1869-0963/143/001-019 [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Borrero FJ. (2008) An annotated checklist of the land snail family Orthalicidae (Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Orthalicoidea) in Ecuador, with notes on the distribution of the mainland species. Zootaxa 1768: 1–40. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Romero PE. (2012) Support and surprises: molecular phylogeny of the land snail superfamily Orthalicoidea using a three-locus gene analysis with divergence time analysis and ancestral area reconstruction. Archiv für Molluskenkunde 141: 1–20. doi: 10.1127/arch.moll/1869-0963/141/001-020 [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Schouten JR. (1985) Notes on and descriptions of Bulimulidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda), III. Zoologische Verhandelingen Leiden 216: 1–98. [Google Scholar]
- Breure ASH, Whisson CS. (2012) Annotated type catalogue of Bothriembryon (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Orthalicoidea) in Australian museums, with a compilation of types in other museums. ZooKeys 195: 41–80. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.194.2721 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Broderip WJ. (1828) Description of a new land shell from South America together with an additional note on Argonauta. The Zoological Journal 4: 222–225. [Google Scholar]
- Broderip WJ. (1832) New species of shells collected by Mr. Cuming on the western coast of South America and in the islands of the South Pacific Ocean. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1832): 124–126.
- Broderip WJ. (1836) Descriptions of some species of shells apparently not hitherto recorded. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1836): 43–45.
- Broderip WJ, Sowerby I GB. (1829) Observations on new or interesting Mollusca, contained, for the most part, in the Museum of the Zoological Society. The Zoological Journal 5: 46–51. [Google Scholar]
- Broderip WJ, Sowerby I GB. (1832) [Descriptions of new (...) Mollusca and Conchifera (...) part of the collection made by Mr. H. Cuming]. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1832): 25–33.
- Coan EV, Kabat AR, Petit RE. (2013a) 2,400 years of malacology. Annex 1: Collations of malacological significance, 1–89 http://www.malacological.org/pdfs/2400collations.pdf [accessed 12 September 2013]
- Coan EV, Kabat AR, Petit RE. (2013b) 2,400 years of malacology. Annex 2: Collation of the Systematisches Conchylien-Cabinet (1837–1920), 1–66 http://www.malacological.org/pdfs/2400collations(Kuster).pdf [accessed 12 September 2013]
- da Costa SI. (1898) Remarks on some species of Bulimulus, sect. Drymaeus, and descriptions of land shells from Bolivia, Ecuador and the U.S. of Colombia. Proceedings of the malacological Society of London 3: 80–84. [Google Scholar]
- da Costa SI. (1901) Descriptions of new species of land-shells from Central and South America. Proceedings of the malacological Society of London 4: 238–240. [Google Scholar]
- Dance SP. (1966) Shell collecting: an illustrated history. University of California Press, Berkeley, 343 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Duncan FM. (1937) On the dates of publication of the Society’s ‘Proceedings’ 1859–1926. With an Appendix establishing the dates of publication of the ‘Proceedings’ 1830–1858, compiled by the late F.H. Waterhouse, and of the ‘Transactions’ 1833–1869, by the late Henry Peavot, originally published in P.Z.S. 1893, 1913. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 107: 71–84. [Google Scholar]
- Fulton HC. (1896) Descriptions of new species of Nanina, Helix, Amphidromus, and Porphyrobaphe. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (6) 18: 100–104. doi: 10.1080/00222939608680416 [Google Scholar]
- Fulton HC. (1897) On supposed new species of Oleacina, Trochomorpha, and Bulimulus. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (6) 20: 212–214. doi: 10.1080/00222939708680614 [Google Scholar]
- Gassies JB. (1869) Descriptions d’espèces nouvelles de la Nouvelle-Calédonie. Journal de Conchyliologie 17: 71–78. [Google Scholar]
- Germain L. (1910) Étude sur les mollusques terrestres et fluviatiles recueillis par M. le Dr. Rivet. In: Mission du Service Géographique de l’Armée pour la mésure d’un arc de méridien équatorial en Amérique du Sud sous le contrôle scientifique de l’Académie des Sciences, 1899–1906. Tome 9 Zoologie, (3) Mollusques-Annélides-Oligochètes, C.1–C.77. [Google Scholar]
- Gould AA. (1847) [Descriptions of the following species of Partula, Pupa, and Balea, collected by the Exploring Expedition]. Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History 2: 196–198. [Google Scholar]
- Gould AA. (1852) United States exploring expedition, during the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N., Vol. 12. Mollusca and shells. Gould and Lincoln, Boston, 1–510. [Google Scholar]
- Gould AA. (1856) United States exploring expedition, during the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N., Atlas. Mollusca and shells. Gould and Lincoln, Boston, 1–16 [legend; + 52 pls]. [Google Scholar]
- Gould AA. (1862) Otia conchologica: descriptions of shells and mollusks, from 1839 to 1862. Gould and Lincoln, Boston, 1–256. [Google Scholar]
- Grateloup JPS de. (1839a) Note sur un mémoire relatif à des mollusques exotiques nouveaux ou peu connus. Actes de la Société linnéenne de Bordeaux 11: 161–170. [Google Scholar]
- Grateloup JPS de. (1839b) Mémoire descriptif sur plusieurs espèces de coquilles nouvelles ou peu connus de mollusques exotiques vivants, terrestres, fluviatiles et marins. Actes de la Société linnéenne de Bordeaux 11: 389–455. [Google Scholar]
- Gray JE. (1828) Spicilegia zoologica; or original figures and short systematic descriptions of new and unfigured animals 1: 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Gray JE. (1834) [Various undescribed shells, chiefly contained in his own collection]. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1834): 57–68.
- Gray JE. (1854) List of the shells of South America in the collection of the British Museum; collected and described by M. Alcide d’Orbigny in the “Voyage dans l’Amérique Méridionale”. Trustees of the British Museum, London, 1–89. [Google Scholar]
- Gray JE, Sowerby I GB. (1839) Molluscous animals and their shells: 101–155. In: Beechey FW. The zoology of Captain Beechey’s voyage; compiled from the collections and notes made by Captain Beechey, the officers and naturalist of the expedition, during a voyage to the Pacific and Behring Straits performed in His Majesty Ship ‘Blossom’, under the command of Captain F.W. Beechey, R.N., F.R.S., &c. &c. in the years 1825, 26, 27, and 28. Bohn, London. [Google Scholar]
- Guppy RJL. (1866) On the terrestrial and fluviatile Mollusca of Trinidad. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (3) 17: 42–56. [Google Scholar]
- Guppy RJL. (1868) On the terrestrial Mollusca of Dominica and Grenada; with an account of some new species from Trinidad. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (4) 1: 429–442. doi: 10.1080/00222936808695726 [Google Scholar]
- Guppy RJL. (1878) Note sur l’Haliotinella patinaria et sur quelques autres mollusques des Antilles. Journal de Conchyliologie 26: 321–325. [Google Scholar]
- Higgins ET. (1872) Descriptions of six new species of shells. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1872): 685–687.
- Hubendick B. (1951) Recent Lymnaeidae, their variation, morphology, taxonomy, nomenclature, and distribution. Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar 3(1): 1–223. [Google Scholar]
- Jaeckel S. (1952) Short review of the land- and freshwater molluscs of the north-east states of Brazil. Dusenia 3: 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- King PP, Broderip WJ. (1831) Description of the Cirrhipeda, Conchifera and Mollusca, in a collection formed by the Officers of H.M.S. Adventure and Beagle employed between the years 1826 and 1830 in surveying the southern coast of South America, including the Straits of Magalhaens and the coast of Tierra del Fuego. The Zoological Journal 5: 332–349. [Google Scholar]
- Küster HC, Pfeiffer L. (1840–1855. [1840–1865]) Die Gattungen Bulimus, Partula, Achatinella, Achatina und Azeca. Systematisches Conchylien-Cabinet von Martini und Chemnitz, I, 13(1): i–xix, 1–395. [Google Scholar]
- Linares EL, Vera ML. (2012) Catálogo de los moluscos continentales de Colombia. Instituto de Ciencias Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, 360 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Martens E von. (1890–1901) Land and freshwater Mollusca. In: Godman FD, Salvin O. (Eds) Biologia Centrali-Americana. R.H. Poter and Dulau & Co., London, i–xxviii, 1–706. [Google Scholar]
- Morelet A. (1849) Testacea novissima insulae Cubanae et Americae centralis, I J.-B. Baillière, Paris, 1–31. doi: 10.5962/bhl.title.11067 [Google Scholar]
- Morelet A. (1851) Testacea novissima insulae Cubanae et Americae centralis, II J.-B. Baillière, Paris, 1–30. [Google Scholar]
- Morelet A. (1863) Séries conchyliologiques, comprenant l’énumeration de mollusques, terrestres et fluviatiles receuillis pendant le cours de différents voyages, ainsi que la description de plusieurs espèces nouvelles, III Pérou. Klincksieck, Paris, 131–221. [Google Scholar]
- Muratov IV, Gargominy O. (2011) Taxonomic position of the land snail Bulimus demerarensis L. Pfeiffer 1861 (Gastropoda, Pulmonata, Bulimulidae). Journal of Conchology 40: 611–615. [Google Scholar]
- Neubert E, Chérel-Mora C, Bouchet P. (2009) Polytypy, clines, and fragmentation: The bulimus of New Caledonia revisited (Pulmonata, Orthalicoidea, Placostylidae). In: Grandcolas P. (Ed.) Zoologia Neocaledonica 7. Biodiversity studies in New Caledonia.Mémoires du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle 198: 37–131.
- d’Orbigny A. (1834–1847) Voyage dans l’Amérique mériodionale (le Brésil, la république orientale de l’Uruguay, la république Argentine, la Patagonie, la république du Chile, la république de Bolivia, la république du Pérou), exécuté pendant les années 1826, 1827, 1828, 1829, 1830, 1831, 1832, et 1833. Tome 5, Partie 3, Mollusques. P. Bertrand, Paris: /V. Levrault, Strasbourg, 758 pp. [Google Scholar]
- d’Orbigny A. (1835) Synopsis terrestrium et fluviatilium molluscorum, in suo per Americam meriodionalem itinere. Magasin de Zoologie 5(61): 1–44. [Google Scholar]
- Pain T. (1959) Orthalicus (Metorthalicus) labeo (Broderip): a rare Peruvian land snail. Journal of Conchology 24: 357–358. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1841) Symbolae ad historiam heliceorum, 1 Th. Fischeri, Casselis, 1–88. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1842) Symbolae ad historiam heliceorum, 2 Th. Fischeri, Casselis, 1–147. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1845) Descriptions of twenty-two new species of Helix, from the collections of Miss Saul-Walton Esq., and H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1845): 71–75.
- Pfeiffer L. (1846) Description of thirty new species of Helicea belonging to the collection of H. Cuming Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1846): 28–34.
- Pfeiffer L. (1847) Description of thirty-eight new species of land-shells, in the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1846): 109–116.
- Pfeiffer L. (1848a) Description of nineteen new species of land-shells, in the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1847): 229–232.
- Pfeiffer L. (1848b) Monographia heliceorum viventium: sistens descriptiones systematicas et criticas omnium huius familiae generum et specierum hodie cognitarum, 2 Brockhaus, Lipsiae, 1–594. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1852) Diagnosen neuer Heliceen. Zeitschrift für Malakozoologie 9: 91–95. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1853a) Diagnosen neuer Heliceen. Zeitschrift für Malakozoologie 10: 51–60. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1853b) Monographia heliceorum viventium: sistens descriptiones systematicas et criticas omnium huius familiae generum et specierum hodie cognitarum, 3 Brockhaus, Lipsiae, 711 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1854a) Descriptions of sixty-six new species of land shells, from the collection of H. Cuming Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1852): 56–70.
- Pfeiffer L. (1854b) Descriptions of fourteen new species of land shells, from the collection of Hugh Cuming Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1852): 135–138.
- Pfeiffer L. (1854c) Descriptions of nineteen new species of land shells, collected by M. Bourcier, Consul-Genral, Quito. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1852): 151–156.
- Pfeiffer L. (1854d) Description of nineteen new species of Helicea, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1853): 124–128.
- Pfeiffer L. (1854–1855) Die Gattungen Daudebardia, Simpulopsis, Vitrina und Succinea. Systematisches Conchylien-Cabinet von Martini und Chemnitz, I, 11: 1–59. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1855a) Descriptions of sixteen new species of Helicea, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1854): 122–126.
- Pfeiffer L. (1855b) Descriptions of fifty-seven new species of Helicea, from Mr. Cuming’s collection. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1854): 286–298.
- Pfeiffer L. (1855c) Description of fourty-seven new species of Helicea, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1855): 91–101.
- Pfeiffer L. (1855d) Description of thirty-eight new species of land-shells, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1855): 111–119.
- Pfeiffer L. (1856) Descriptions of twenty-five new species of land-shells, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1856): 32–36.
- Pfeiffer L. (1857a) Diagnosen interessanter Novitäten. Malakozoologische Blätter 3: 256–261. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1857b) Descriptions of twenty-seven new species of land-shells, collected by M. Sallé in the State of Vera Cruz, Mexico. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1856): 318–324.
- Pfeiffer L. (1857c) Descriptions of fifty-eight new species of Helicea from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1856): 324–336.
- Pfeiffer L. (1857d) Description of thirty-three new species of land-shells, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1856): 385–392.
- Pfeiffer L. (1857e) Diagnosen neuer Landschneckenen. Malakozoologische Blätter 4: 155–158. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1858) Diagnosen neuer Schnecken-Arten. Malakozoologische Blätter 5: 238–240. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1859) Monographia heliceorum viventium: sistens descriptiones systematicas et criticas omnium huius familiae generum et specierum hodie cognitarum, 4 Brockhaus, Lipsiae, 1–920. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1860) Descriptions of thirty-six new species of land-shells from Mr. H. Cuming’s collection. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1860): 133–141.
- Pfeiffer L. (1860–1866) Novitates conchologicae, series prima. Mollusca extramarina. Descriptions et figures de coquilles extramarines nouvellesou peu connues. Theodor Fischer, Cassel. 2: 139–303. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1861a) Diagnosen neuer Heliceen. Malakozoologische Blätter 8: 11–16, 77–84. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1861b) Description of fifty-seven new species of land-shells, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1861): 20–29.
- Pfeiffer L. (1862) Description of sixteen new species of land-shells from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1861): 386–389.
- Pfeiffer L. (1863) Description of thirty-six new species of land-shells, from the collection of H. Cuming, Esq. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1862): 268–278.
- Pfeiffer L. (1868a) Monographia heliceorum viventium: sistens descriptiones systematicas et criticas omnium huius familiae generum et specierum hodie cognitarum, 5 Brockhaus, Lipsiae, 565 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Pfeiffer L. (1868b) Monographia heliceorum viventium: sistens descriptiones systematicas et criticas omnium huius familiae generum et specierum hodie cognitarum, 6 Brockhaus, Lipsiae, 598 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Philippi RA. (1845–1847) Abbildungen und Beschreibungen neuer oder wenig gekannter Conchylien. Fischer, Cassel. 2: 1–231. [Google Scholar]
- Pilsbry HA. (1895–1896) American bulimi and bulimuli. Strophocheilus, Plekocheilus, Auris, Bulimulus. Manual of Conchology (2) 10: i–iv, 1–213. [Google Scholar]
- Pilsbry HA. (1897–1898) American Bulimulidae: Bulimulus, Neopetraeus, Oxychona and South American Drymaeus. Manual of Conchology (2) 11: 1–399. [Google Scholar]
- Pilsbry HA. (1899) American Bulimulidae: North American and Antillean Drymaeus, Leiostracus, Orthalicinae and Amphibuliminae. Manual of Conchology (2) 12: 1–258. [Google Scholar]
- Pilsbry HA. (1901–1902) Oriental bulimoid Helicidae; Odontostomidae; Cerionidae. Manual of Conchology (2) 14: 1–302. [Google Scholar]
- Pilsbry HA. (1908–1910) Caecilioides, Glessula, and Partulidae. Index to volumes 16–20. Manual of Conchology (2) 20: i–viii, 1–326. [Google Scholar]
- Preston HB. (1907) Descriptions of new species of land and freshwater shells from Central and South America. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (7) 20: 490–498. doi: 10.1080/00222930709487375 [Google Scholar]
- Preston HB. (1909) New land, freswater and marine shells from South America. Annals and Magazine of Natural History (8) 3: 507–513. doi: 10.1080/00222930908692616 [Google Scholar]
- Reeve LA. (1848–1850) Conchologica iconica or illustrations of the shells of molluscous animals, 5. Bulimus. Reeve, Benham and Reeve, London, i–ix, 89 pls. + legend. [Google Scholar]
- Reeve LA. (1850a) Description of a new species of Bulimus from the collection of A.L. Gubba, Esq., of Havre. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1849): 16.
- Reeve LA. (1850b) Description of sixteen new species of Bulimus, in the collections of H. Cuming, Esq., discovered by Mr. William Lobb in the Andes of Peru. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1849): 96–100.
- Reeve LA. (1859) Description of two new species of Bulimus from the collection of Mrs. de Burgh. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1859): 123–124.
- Reeve LA. (1862) Monograph of the genus Simpulopsis. In: Reeve LA. (1860–1862) Conchologica iconica or illustrations of the shells of molluscous animals. Reeve and Co., London, 13: 2 pls. + legend. [Google Scholar]
- Rehder HA. (1945) A note on Megaspira elata Gould. The Nautilus 59: 67. [Google Scholar]
- Richards HG, Wagenaar Hummelinck P. (1940) Land and freshwater mollusks from Margarita Island, Venezuela. Notulae Naturae 62: 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Richardson CL. (1993) Bulimulacea: catalog of species. Amphibulimidae, Anadromidae, Grangerellidae, Odontostomidae, Orthalicidae. Tryonia 27: 1–164. [Google Scholar]
- Richardson CL. (1995) Bulimulidae: catalog of species. Tryonia 28: i–iii, 1–458. [Google Scholar]
- Rochebrune AT de. (1882) Supplément aux documents sur la faune malacologique de la Cochinchine et du Cambodge. Bulletin de la Société Philomathique de Paris (7) 6: 99–118 [Google Scholar]
- Salvador RB, Cavallari DC. (2013) Taxonomic revision of Leiostracus onager and Leiostracus subtuszonatus (Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Orthalicidae). Journal of Conchology 41: 511–518. [Google Scholar]
- Salvador RB, Cavallari DC, Breure ASH. (2014) Corrigendum to “Taxonomic revision of Leiostracus onager and Leiostracus subtuszonatus (Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Orthalicidae)” by Salvador & Cavallari (2013). Journal of Conchology 42: 627–628. [Google Scholar]
- Schileyko AA. (1999) Treatise on Recent terrestrial pulmonate molluscs, 3. Partulidae, Aillyidae, Bulimulidae, Orthalicidae, Megaspiridae, Urocoptidae. Ruthenica, Supplement 2: 263–436.
- Silva LF da, Thomé JW. (2006) Duas novas espécies de Simpulopsis (Gastropoda, Bulimulidae) para o Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Iheringia Zoología 96: 185–196. doi: 10.1590/S0073-47212006000200008 [Google Scholar]
- Silva LF da, Thomé JW. (2007) Re-description of Simpulopsis decussata Pfeiffer 1856 (Mollusca: Gastropoda: Pulmonata: Bulimulidae). Archiv für Molluskenkunde 136: 9–17. doi: 10.1127/arch.moll/0003-9284/136/009-017 [Google Scholar]
- Simone LRL. (2006) Land and freshwater molluscs of Brazil. EGB/Fapesp, São Paulo, 390 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Smith EA. (1895) Report on the land and freshwater shells collected by Mr. Herbert H. Smith at St. Vincent, Grenada, and other neighbouring islands. Proceedings of the Malacological Society, London 1: 300–322 [Google Scholar]
- Smith EA. (1902) On Corona pfeifferi, var. gracilis, n.var., from S.E. Colombia. Proceedings of the malacological Society of London 5: 170. [Google Scholar]
- Smith EA. (1907) Notes on Achatina dennisoni Reeve, and A. magnifica Pfeiffer. Proceedings of the malacological Society of London 7: 313–314. [Google Scholar]
- Sowerby I GB. (1824) Descriptions, accompanied by figures, of several new species of shells. The Zoological Journal 1: 58–60. [Google Scholar]
- Sowerby I GB. (1833) New species of shells collected by Mr. Cuming on the Western coast of South America and among the Islands of the South Pacific Ocean. They were accompanied by characters from the pen of Mr. G. B. Sowerby. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1833): 34–38, 70–74.
- Sowerby I GB, Sowerby II GB. (1832–1841) Conchological illustrations, or coloured figures of all the hitherto unfigured recent shells, Bulinus. Sowerby, London, [5]–8, 103 figs. [Google Scholar]
- Sowerby II GB. (1849) Description of a new species of the genus Tomigerus, Spix. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1849): 14–15.
- Sowerby III GB. (1889) Descriptions of fourteen new species of shells. Journal of the linnean Society of London 20: 395–400. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.1889.tb01450.x [Google Scholar]
- Sowerby III GB. (1890) Description of thirteen new species of land-shells, with a note on Bulimus fulminans. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1889): 577–582.
- Sowerby III GB. (1892) Descriptions of nine new species of shells. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London (1892): 296–299.
- Strebel H. (1909) Revision der Unterfamilie der Orthalicinen. Jahrbuch der Hamburgischen Wissenschaftlichen Anstalten 26, Beiheft 2: 1–191. [Google Scholar]
- Strebel H, Pfeffer G. (1882) Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Fauna mexikanischer Land- und Süsswasser-Conchylien. Unter berücksichtigung der Fauna angrezender Gebieten. G.J. Herbst, Hamburg 5: 1–144. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson FG. (2011) An annotated checklist and bibliography of the land and freshwater snails of Mexico and Central America. Bulletin Florida Museum of Natural History 50: 1–299. [Google Scholar]
- Tillier S. (1980) Gastéropodes terrestre et fluviatiles de Guyane française. Mémoires du Muséum nationale d’Histoire naturelle (nouv. série) A118: 1–189. [Google Scholar]
- Weyrauch WK. (1964) Nuevos gastrópodos terrestres y nuevos sinonimos de Sudamérica, II. Acta Zoologica Lilloana 20: 33–60. [Google Scholar]
- Wood H, Gallichan J. (2008) The new molluscan names of César-Marie-Félix Ancey including illustrated type material from the National Museum of Wales. Studies in Biodiversity and Systematics of Terrestrial Organisms from the National Museum of Wales, Biotir Reports 3: i–vi, 1–162. [Google Scholar]
- Wood W. (1828) Supplement to the Index Testaceologicus; or a catalogue of shells, British and foreign. Wood, London, [v +] 59 pp. [Google Scholar]