Lautoconus eschewegi

Harzhauser, Mathias & Landau, Bernard, 2016, A revision of the Neogene Conidae and Conorbidae (Gastropoda) of the Paratethys Sea, Zootaxa 4210 (1), pp. 1-178 : 76-77

Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866)

Figs 3 V, 16A1–A2,16B1–B3, 16C1–C2, 16D1–D2

Conus Eschewegi Costa—Pereira da Costa 1866: 29, pl. 9, figs 18, 19a–b, 21, 23a–b [non figs 20, 22, 34].

Conus (Dendroconus) subraristriatus da Costa—Hoernes & Auinger 1879: 23 (partim), pl. 1, fig. 20 [non Lautoconus subraristriatus (Pereira da Costa, 1866)].

[ Conus ] D. [endroconus] Eschewegi var. caelata (Dod. Sacc.) — Sacco 1893a: 13, pl. 1, fig. 24.

[ Conus ] D. [endroconus] Eschewegi var. depressoastensis Sacc. — Sacco 1893a: 13, pl. 1, fig. 25.

Dendroconus pyruloides (Dod. Sacc.) — Sacco 1893a: 13, pl. 1, fig. 26.

Dendroconus cf. Eschewegi Da Cost. var. caelata Dod., Sacc. — Szalay 1926: 334.

Conus eschewegi Da Costa—Davoli 1972: 107 , pl. 6, figs 1–16.

Dendroconus pyruloides Sacco, 1893 , Doderlein in schedis—Ferrero-Mortara et al. 1984: 102, pl. 15, figs 9a–b, pl. 16, figs 7a– b.

Conus eschewegi Da Costa—Ruggieri & Davoli 1984: 72 , pl. 5, figs 19a–b, 22a–b.

Conus eschewegi Da Costa—Davoli 2003: 451 , pl. 1, fig. 14.

? Conus eschewegi (P. da Costa, 1866)— Gonçalves & Monteiro 2012: 32, unnumbered fig page 35.

Lautoconus belus (d’Orbigny, 1852) — Kovács & Vicián 2013: 68, figs 4, 53–55 [non Lautoconus belus (d’Orbigny 1852) ].

Lautoconus eschewegi (da Costa)— Kovács & Vicián 2013: 70, figs 7, 56–61.

Lautoconus pyrula ( Brocchi, 1814) — Kovács & Vicián 2013: 71, figs 7, 62–65 [non Lautoconus pyrula ( Brocchi, 1814) ].

Type material. Specimens illustrated in Pereira da Costa (1866, pl. 9, figs 23a–b, selected as lectotype proposed by Sacco (1893a); Tortonian, Cacela Basin, Portugal. The whereabouts of the collection are unknown to us.

Studied material. 7 spec. NHMW 1858 /0043/0007, Lăpugiu de Sus ( Romania), including specimen illustrated in Hoernes & Auinger (1879, pl. 1, fig. 20), 7 spec . NHMW 1854 /0035/0035, Lăpugiu de Sus ( Romania), 1 spec NHMW A1609, Lăpugiu de Sus ( Romania) ; 11 spec. NHMW 2016 /0007/0001, Letkés ( Hungary) .

Illustrated material. Figs 16A 1 –A2,: Lăpugiu de Sus ( Romania), SL: 39.9 mm, MD: 22.9 mm, NHMW 1858/ 0043/0007; Figs 16 B1–B2, 3V: Lăpugiu de Sus ( Romania), SL: 42.8 mm, MD: 23.8 mm, NHMW 1858/0043/0007, specimen illustrated in Hoernes & Auinger (1879, pl. 1, fig. 20); Figs 16 C1–C2: Letkés ( Hungary), SL: 32.6 mm, MD: 18.7 mm, NHMW 2016/0007/0001b; Figs 16 D1–D2: Letkés ( Hungary), SL: 39.6 mm, MD: 23.2 mm, NHMW 2016/0007/0001a.

Revised description. Medium-sized, pyriform shells; extraordinarily pointed, turreted early spire (but poorly preserved in all specimens); later spire low conical to cyrtoconoid with channelled suture; spiral whorls slightly convex; subsutural flexure very shallow, weakly curved, moderately asymmetrical; shoulder strongly rounded, slightly subangulate in fully grown shells. Last whorl elongate and conical, constricted at base. Moderately long, broad and reflected siphonal canal; aperture moderately wide, slightly widening anteriorly. Siphonal fasciole swollen, strongly twisted, not well demarcated from base and straight, broad inner lip. Few wavy spiral grooves on base demarcating broad spiral cords. Colour pattern consisting of slightly irregularly spaced spirals formed by short dashes and subquadratic dots; size of dots rather homogenous within a spiral but may vary in size and density between spirals; sometimes two spirals form a close-spaced pair with nearly amalgamating dots. Dots become axially elongate on shoulder, rarely forming an inverted “Y”; narrow axially elongated stripes on spire whorls.

Shell measurements and ratios. n = 7: largest specimen: SL: 42.8 mm, MD: 23.8 mm, mean SL: 37.4 mm (σ = 3.5), mean MD: 20.8 mm (σ = 2.1), spire angle: µ = 113.3° (σ = 8.6°), last whorl angle: µ = 37.0° (σ = 1.4°), LW: µ = 1.8 (σ = 0.04), RD: µ = 0.63 (σ = 0.01), PMD: µ = 0.86 (σ = 0.01), RSH: µ = 0.12 (σ = 0.03).

Discussion. Tucker & Tenorio (2009) proposed a placement of this species in Lautoconus Monterosato, 1923 . The completely smooth spire whorls, which lack any sculpture even on earliest teleoconch whorls and the mode of siphonal canal formation would perfectly fit in Varioconus da Motta, 1991 , which however is currently considered to be a junior synonym of Lautoconus ( Puillandre et al. 2014a, b).

Hoernes & Auinger (1979) illustrated three shells as “ Dendroconus subraristriatus ”, which represent three different species, of which none is conspecific with Lautoconus subraristriatus (Pereira da Costa, 1866). The reason for uniting these different morphologies in a single species was the superficial similarity in colour patterns and the also much too broad species concept of Pereira da Costa (1866) (see Landau et al. 2013 and discussion of Lautoconus subraristriatus ).

The original description of Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866) united several morphotypes, which are most probably not conspecific. Therefore, Sacco (1893a) designated the slender, pyriform specimen illustrated by Pereira da Costa (1866, fig. 23) as type of this species. This species was also described as Conus pyruloides Sacco, 1893 , from the late Miocene of Italy, which was considered to be a junior synonym of L. eschewegi by Hall (1966) and Davoli (1972). In the material from Letkés in the collection of the NHMW, this species is easily recognised under UV light by its conspicuous and intense colour pattern. This also allows the identification of subadult shells, which have a weaker siphonal fasciole, shorter siphonal canal and an evenly rounded shoulder. Therefore, we consider the specimens identified by Kovács & Vicián (2013) as Lautoconus belus (d’Orbigny, 1852) and L. pyrula ( Brocchi, 1814) to represent different morphotypes and growth stages of L. eschewegi . Moreover, Lautoconus belus sensu Hall (1966, pl. 22, figs 15–16) and Muñiz-Solís (1999, figs 7A–B) differs from the Paratethyan species in its broader outline, better defined shoulder and the conspicuous spiral sculpture on the last whorl and L. pyrula has a strong spiral sculpture on the base, a much weaker fasciole and a well-defined shoulder.

Muñiz-Solís (1999) described Conus eschewegi from the lower upper Pliocene of Estepona. These specimens develop a comparatively broad conical last whorl and are most probably not conspecific with L. eschewegi . The superficially similar Kalloconus fuscocingulatus (Hörnes, 1851) differs in the colour pattern of continuous spirals and the tuberculate spire whorls.

Paleoenvironment. Probably shallow marine environments based on the coral-associated assemblages at species Letkés in Hungary ( Kovács & Vicián 2013).

Distribution in Paratethys. Badenian (middle Miocene): Transylvanian Basin: Lăpugiu de Sus ( Romania); Pannonian Basin: Pannonian Basin: Várpalota, Letkés ( Hungary) ( Szalay 1926; Kovács & Vicián 2013).

Proto-Mediterranean Sea and northeastern Atlantic. Tortonian: Cacela Basin: Cacela Velha (Portugal) (Pereira da Costa 1866); Sant'Agata Fossili, Stazzano, Montegibbio (Po Basin, Italy) ( Sacco, 1893a; Davoli 1972); Casa Nova Calises, Forlì (Apennines, Italy) ( Ruggieri & Davoli 1984); Messinian: Borelli (Turin Hills) ( Davoli 2003). The early Pliocene occurrences from Vezza d’Alba and Asti (Po Basin, Italy) need confirmation ( Davoli 1972).

Figures

FIGURE 1. Map of central and south – eastern Europe showing the geographic position of selected localities with rich Conidae diversities (modified from Kováč et al. 2007). 1: Korytnica (Poland), 2: Podhorce, Zukowce, Biłka, Tarnopol (Ukraine), 3: Grund, Guntersdorf, Immendorf (Austria), 4: Steinebrunn (Austria), Mikulov (Czech Republic), 5: Gainfarn, Enzesfeld, Baden, Bad Vöslau, Baden-Sooß (Austria), 6: Ritzing (Austria), 7: Weitendorf, Pöls (Austria), 8: Letkés, Szob (Hungary), 9: Borsodbóta (Hungary), 10: Várpalota (Hungary), 11: Hidas (Hungary), 12: Coşteiu de Sus, Lăpugiu de Sus (Romania).

FIGURE 16 A 1 – A 2. Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866), Lăpugiu de Sus (Romania), NHMW 1858 / 0043 / 0007. 16 B 1 – B 2. Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866), Lăpugiu de Sus (Romania), NHMW 1858 / 0043 / 0007. 16 C 1 – C 2. Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866), Letkés (Hungary), NHMW 2016 / 0007 / 0001 b. 16 D 1 – D 2. Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866), Letkés (Hungary), NHMW 2016 / 0007 / 0001 a. 16 E 1 – E 3. Lautoconus kovacsi nov. sp., Letkés, (Hungary), NHMW 2016 / 0003 / 0001, holotype. 16 F 1 – F 3. Lautoconus kovacsi nov. sp., Letkés, (Hungary), NHMW 2016 / 0003 / 0 0 0 3, paratype. 16 G 1 – G 2. Lautoconus kovacsi nov. sp., Letkés, (Hungary), NHMW 2016 / 0003 / 0002, paratype. 16 H 1 – H 3. Lautoconus kovacsi nov. sp., Letkés, (Hungary), NHMW 2016 / 0003 / 0004 a, paratype. 16 I 1 – I 3. Lautoconus kovacsi nov. sp., Letkés, (Hungary), NHMW 2016 / 0003 / 0004 a, paratype.