Helix caput-spinulae Reeve, 1852
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4697.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:AF79BEA3-3CC8-49CA-9707-A8D5B4DAACD |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/437587C2-FF80-6545-FF02-E8C6D6051261 |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Helix caput-spinulae Reeve, 1852 |
status |
|
Helix caput-spinulae Reeve, 1852
Pl. 8, fig. A
Reeve, (1851–1854) 1852. Conchologia iconica, 7: species 818, pl. 133, fig. 818.
Type material: Original description based on one or more specimens in the Cuming collection. Lectotype, NHMUK 1962724 (dry shell material); ex Museum Cuming (Acc. no. 1829). Lectotype fixed by inference of holotype ( ICZN Article 74.6) by Climo (1981: 9–10).
Label details: ‘ H. epsilon Pfr , New Zeal (1)’—in Pfeiffer’s handwriting.
Type locality: ‘New Zealand’ (Reeve 1852 [in 1851–1854]: species 818).
Previous illustrations of type material: Reeve (1852 [in 1851–1854]: pl. 133, fig. 818), Tryon (1887 [from Reeve 1852]: pl. 20, fig. 53).
Remarks: Helix caput-spinulae Reeve, 1852 [hereafter listed as H. caputspinulae in concordance with ICZN Article 11.9.5] and H. epsilon Pfeiffer, 1853 are based on the same type material. The earliest name known to have been proposed for this species was Helix pusilla Lowe, 1831 , based on specimens from the Atlantic island of Madeira, but that name was pre-occupied by H. pusilla of Vallot, 1801, and of Fleming, 1828 (see Roth 1987: 95, 96). Reeve’s taxon is also conspecific with Helix servilis Shuttleworth, 1852 , from the Canary Islands (see Neubert & Gosteli 2003: 49, pl. 15, fig. 3). The original description of H. servilis was published in May 1852 ( Shuttleworth 1852: 137), whereas Reeve’s description of H. caputspinulae was probably published in October 1852 ( Roth 1987: 96; Petit 2007: table 3), giving Shuttleworth’s name priority ( Falkner et al. 2002: 117–118). There has been considerable confusion over the identity of Helix caputspinulae among New Zealand authors. Reeve’s name was used incorrectly by some (e.g., Suter 1913b: 715; Climo 1970a: 330; Powell 1979: 309; Schileyko 2001: fig. 1288) for material of Helix eta Pfeiffer, 1853 . Helix caputspinulae was also designated as the type species of the subgenus Fectola (Subfectola) Powell, 1939 , based on material of Helix eta Pfeiffer, 1853 (see Climo 1981: 9; Goulstone 1995: 63). Climo (1981: 9, 10) re-examined the type material of Helix caputspinulae , and assigned it to the genus Paralaoma Iredale, 1913 , in the family Punctidae . Helix servilis (= H. caputspinulae ) is a weedy species with a very wide global distribution (see below), and has many synonyms (e.g., Gittenberger et al. 1980; Roth 1986: 23, 25; Smith 1992: 282; Neubert 1998; Falkner et al. 2002; Hausdorf 2002; Christensen et al. 2012). Conspecific taxa in the New Zealand region include: Microphysa pumila Hutton, 1882 , described from Christchurch and Eyreton, Canterbury; and Paralaoma ambigua Iredale, 1913 and P. raoulensis Iredale, 1913 , from Raoul Island, Kermadec Islands. The last-named is the type species of Paralaoma Iredale, 1913 , by subsequent designation of Iredale, 1937.
Current Taxonomy: Treated as a junior synonym of Paralaoma servilis ( Shuttleworth, 1852) by Falkner et al. (2002: 117–118), Hausdorf (2002) and Christensen et al. (2012).
Distribution: Native to New Zealand (present on North, South, Stewart, Chatham, Three Kings, Kermadec islands), and possibly Australia, with a wide adventive distribution, including parts of Europe, Middle East, Africa, Asia, North and South America, and in Réunion, Madeira, Canary Islands, Jamaica, Indonesia, Hawai’ian Islands, and Easter Island (e.g., Gittenberger et al. 1980, and Roth 1986 —as Punctum pusillum ; Smith 1992, and Griffiths & Florens 2006 —as Paralaoma caputspinulae ; Neubert 1998 —as Toltecia pusilla ; Hausdorf 2002, and Christensen et al. 2012 —as Paralaoma servilis ).
NHMUK |
Natural History Museum, London |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |