Chamalycaeus logtakensis (Godwin-Austen, 1914)

Fig. 8

Alycaeus logtakensis Godwin-Austen, 1914: 394–395, pl. 155 fig. 6.

Alycaeus tanghali Godwin-Austen, 1914: 401, pl. 137 figs 3, 3a–b. Syn. nov.

Alycaeus logtakensis – Gude 1921: 209–210.

Alycaeus (Alycaeus) logtakensis – Ramakrishna et al. 2010: 48.

Dicharax (?) logtakensis – Páll-Gergely et al. 2020: 94.

Chamalycaeus tanghali – Páll-Gergely et al. 2020: 46.

Diagnosis

The low R3 without conspicuous swelling distinguishes this species from all congeners of this species group.

Type material examined

INDIA • 1 syntype of A. logtakensis (Fig. 8A–E); on a low hill, Logtak Lake, Munipur; Godwin-Austen coll.; “figured”; NHMUK 1903.7.1.2639 • 6 syntypes of A. tanghali; Munipur; figured by Godwin-Austen; NHMUK 1903.7.1.2671 (Fig. 8F–J) .

Type localities

“Logtak Lake, Munipur (No. 2639 B.M. Coll.), on a low hill near the northern shore” ( A. logtakensis); “Munipur. Exact locality not recorded; somewhere on the northern side of the valley” ( A. tanghali).

Differential diagnosis

The most similar species is C. sculpturus, but that species has a less fringed aperture and a more rounded body whorl.

Remarks

There are no conchological differences between A. logtakensis and A. tanghali, and they are both from central Manipur State. Their descriptions were published in the same work but A. tanghali appeared a few pages later, therefore A. logtakensis is chosen to be the valid name. Godwin-Austen (1914) compared A. tanghali only with A. sculptilis .

Alycaeus logtakensis was included in the genus Dicharax because no spiral striation was observed on the corroded syntype (Páll-Gergely et al. 2020). However, re-examination of the syntype of A. logtakensis revealed spiral striation on the teleoconch. Chamalycaeus tanghali was already classified in Chamalycaeus due to spiral striation on the teleoconch.