Conus

Harzhauser, Mathias & Landau, Bernard, 2016, A revision of the Neogene Conidae and Conorbidae (Gastropoda) of the Paratethys Sea, Zootaxa 4210 (1), pp. 1-178 : 153-154

Conus s.l. mucronatolaevis (Sacco, 1893)

Figs 30 S, 35H1–H3, 35I1–I3, 35J

Conus avellana Lam. —Hörnes 1851: 29 (partim), pl. 3, figs 3a–c [non Conus avellana Lamarck, 1810 ; non fig. 3d, = Plagioconus lapugyensi s ( Hoernes & Auinger, 1879)].

Conus (Chelyconus) avellana Lam. — Hoernes & Auinger 1879: 40 (partim) [non Conus avellana Lamarck, 1810 ].

[ Conus ] Chelyconus mucronatolaevis —Sacco 1893: 66, pl. 6, fig. 26

[ Conus ] Chelyconus globoponderosus Sacc. — Sacco 1893b: 85 (nov. nom. pro Conus avellana in Hörnes 1851 , pl. 3, fig. 3).

Conus argillicolla Eichw. —Friedberg 1911: 53, pl. 2, fig. 16 [non Conus s.l. argillicola Eichwald, 1830 ].

Conus cf. Sturi R. Hoern. i. Auinger—Friedberg 1911: 53, pl. 2, fig. 15 [non Conus s.l. sturi ( Hoernes & Auinger, 1879) ].

Conus (Chelyconus) vindobonensis (Partsch in Hoernes und Auinger 1879)—Kojumdgieva in Kojumdgieva & Strachimirov 1960: 213, pl. 50, figs 4–5 [non Conus s.l vindobonensis ( Hoernes & Auinger, 1879) ]

Conus mucronatolaevis Sacco—Hall 1966: 149 , pl. 26, figs 9–11, 14, 20 [cum syn.].

Conus avellana Lamarck—Davoli 1972 : plate captions, pl. 22, figs 39a–b (specimen from the Vienna Basin!)

Conus mucronatolaevis Sacco 1893 — Krach 1981: 76, pl. 21, figs 3–4, 11–13, 21.

Chelyconus mucronatolaevis Sacco—Ferrero Mortara et al. 1984: 116 , pl. 18, figs 8a–8b.

Varioconus mucronatolaevis (Sacco, 1893) — Kovács & Vicián 2013: 85, figs 121–124.

non Conus (Chelyconus) avellana ( Lamarck, 1810) — Atanacković 1985: 176, pl. 39, fig. 9. non 1999 Conus (Chelyconus) mucronatolaevis (Sacco) —Muñiz-Solis: 53, figs 2/L, 7/M–N.

Type material. Syntype illustrated in Sacco (1893b, pl. 6, fig. 26) and Ferrero-Mortara et al. (1984, pl. 18, fig. 8), stored in the Museo Regionale di Scienze Naturali, Torino (BS. 038.05.043); Baldissero ( Italy), Burdigalian (early Miocene ).

Studied material. 4 spec. NHMW 1847 /0037/0027, Mikulov-Muschelberg ( Czech Republic), including specimen illustrated in Hörnes (1851, pl. 3, figs 3a–c) (= syntype of Conus globoponderosus Sacco, 1893 ); 1 spec . NHMW 1853 /0003/0006, Gainfarn ( Austria) ; 1 spec. NHMW 1846 /0037/0064, Steinebrunn ( Austria) .

Illustrated material. Figs 35 H1–H3: Mikulov-Muschelberg: SL: 59.2 mm, MD: 32.3 mm, NHMW 1847 /0037/ 0 0 27, illustrated in Hörnes (1851, pl. 3, figs 3a–c); Figs 35 I1–I3: Mikulov-Muschelberg ( Czech Republic), SL: 45.4 mm, MD: 23.8 mm, NHMW 1847 /0037/0027; Figs 30 S, 35J: Gainfarn ( Austria), SL: 42.6 mm, MD: 23.3 mm, private collection Anton Breitenberger (Bad Vöslau, Austria) .

Revised description. Moderately large, solid shells; early spire mammillate, coeloconoid with prominent beads along lower suture; later spire globose, cyrtoconoid with nearly flat and striate spire whorls; impressed but not channelled suture. Subsutural flexure shallow, weakly curved, moderately asymmetrical. Last whorl conical, contracting quickly below broadly rounded shoulder; not constricted. Siphonal fasciole nearly absent; weak spiral cords on base. Aperture narrow, slightly flaring towards short siphonal canal. Colour pattern under regular and UV light consisting of densely spaced delicate spirals of tiny dots. In slightly eroded specimens, these dots form tiny beads.

Shell measurements and ratios. n = 5: largest specimen: SL: 66.6 mm, MD: 32.3 mm, mean SL: 50.9 mm (σ = 11.3), mean MD: 26.8 (σ = 5.0), spire angle: µ = 98.8° (σ = 8.0°), last whorl angle: µ = 36° (σ = 1.4°), LW: µ = 1.89 (σ = 0.1), RD: µ = 0.64 (σ = 0.02), PMD: µ = 0.85 (σ = 0.02), RSH: µ = 0.18 (σ = 0.03).

Discussion. Hall (1966) revised Conus mucronatolaevis and synonymized all varieties named by Sacco (1893b). Typical specimens of Conus s.l. mucronatolaevis are rather slender and have a more or less conical spire. Broader specimens with cyrtoconoid spires were described by Sacco (1893b) as Conus m. globospira and C. m. glandispira. The Paratethyan specimens are closer to these morphotypes. In addition, to the numerous variety names for C. mucronatolaevis, Sacco (1893b) introduced globoponderosus as new name for the specimens referred to as Conus avellana by Hörnes (1851). The two specimens illustrated by Hörnes (1851) are almost certainly not conspecific and his fig 3d is most probably a poorly preserved Plagioconus lapugyensis ( Hoernes & Auinger, 1879). Therefore, Conus globoponderosus Sacco, 1893 should be restricted to the specimen illustrated by Hörnes (1851, pl. 3) as figs 3a–c. Within the broad species concept of Hall (1966), Conus globoponderosus Sacco, 1893 is a subjective junior synonym of C. mucronatolaevis ; within a narrower frame, it would still be a subjective junior synonym of Conus globospira Sacco, 1893 . Curiously, Hall (1966) included the specimen illustrated as figs 3a–c in Hörnes (1851, pl. 3) in the synonymy of Conus belus d’Orbigny, 1852 . In our opinion, this decision is unjustified as Lautoconus belus , as redefined by Hall (1966), differs in its smaller size, shorter last whorl, the slightly constricted base and the conspicuous spiral sculpture on the last whorl (see also Muñiz-Solís 1999). The specimen described by Friedberg (1911, pl. 2, fig. 16) as Conus argillicola Eichwald is stored in the Geological Survey of Austria (GBA 1911/2/2) and represents a subadult C. mucronatolaevis .

Mayer (1864: 77) introduced Conus borsoni Mayer, 1864 for a species from the Pliocene or Pleistocene of the Azores without illustration. In the discussion he referred to specimens from the Burdigalian of France ( Grateloup, 1846: pl. 44, fig. 5) and the Badenian of Austria (Hörnes, 1851, pl. 3, fig. 3), both previously described as Conus avellana . As discussed above, the illustrations in Hörnes (1851, pl. 3, figs 3a–d) represent two different species. Moreover, it is doubtful if the much younger specimens from the Azores are conspecific with any of the Miocene species at all. It is beyond the scope of this paper to revise the fossil Conidae of the Azores but to solve the confusion we designate the well preserved syntype from the tuff deposits of Ilhéu de Baixo, stored in the geological-paleontological collections of the ETH Zurich ( Switzerland), as lectotype of Conus borsoni .

Paleoenvironment. Shallow marine environments, partly with seagrass (e.g. Zuschin et al. 2007).

Distribution in Paratethys. Badenian (middle Miocene): Vienna Basin: Gainfarn, Steinebrunn ( Austria), Mikulov-Muschelberg ( Czech Republic) (Hörnes 1851); Pannonian Basin: Letkés ( Hungary) ( Kovács & Vicián 2013); Carpathian Foredeep: Czepiele, Ternopil ( Ukraine) (Friedberg 1911); Węglinek, Łychów ( Poland) ( Krach 1981).

Proto-Mediterranean Sea and northeastern Atlantic. Burdigalian (early Miocene): Turin Hills: Baldissero ( Italy) ( Sacco 1893b), middle Miocene: Aquitaine Basin, Salies-de-Béarn ( France) ( Peyrot 1931).

Figures

FIGURE 35 A 1 – A 3. Conus s. l. olivaeformis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, Lăpugiu de Sus (Romania), NHMW 1858 / 0035 / 0008, syntype. 35 B 1 – B 3. Conus s. l. olivaeformis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, Lăpugiu de Sus (Romania). NHMW 1854 / 0035 / 0046, syntype. 35 C 1 – C 2. Conus s. l. vindobonensis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, Gainfarn (Austria), NHMW 1856 / 0050 / 0115, syntype. 35 D 1 – D 3. Conus s. l. vindobonensis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, Enzesfeld (Austria), NHMW 1846 / 0037 / 0049, syntype. 35 E 1 – E 3. Conus s. l. vindobonensis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, Mikulov-Kienberk (Czech Republic), NHMW 1860 / 0001 / 0067. 35 F. Conus s. l. vindobonensis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, Gainfarn (Austria), NHMW 1856 / 0050 / 0115. 35 G 1 – G 2. Conus s. l. vindobonensis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, Gainfarn (Austria), NHMW 1846 / 0037 / 0043 a. 35 H 1 – H 3. Conus s. l. mucronatolaevis (Sacco, 1893), Mikulov-Muschelberg, NHMW 1847 / 0037 / 0027. 35 I 1 – I 3. Conus s. l. mucronatolaevis (Sacco, 1893), Mikulov- Muschelberg (Czech Republic), NHMW 1847 / 0037 / 0027. 35 J. Conus s. l. mucronatolaevis (Sacco, 1893), Gainfarn (Austria), private collection Anton Breitenberger.