Helicteres rugulosa, Pease, 1870

Cowie, Robert H., Héros, Virginie, Yeung, Norine W. & Hayes, Kenneth A., 2016, Annotated catalogue of types of Hawaiian land and freshwater snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda) in the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, with lectotype designations, Zoosystema 38 (2), pp. 245-266 : 258

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.5252/z2016n2a4
publication LSID	urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:1B3D1C48-C90C-4C96-8BC5-14DEC4F01308
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/187087F9-7F06-FFC0-FEE6-FF1CFA89FA79
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Helicteres rugulosa
status

Treatment

rugulosa Pease, 1870 , Helicteres

( Fig. 4D View FIG )

[ Helicteres View in CoL ] (Amastra) rugulosa Pease, 1870: 95 .

Achatinella (Amastra) rugulosa – Crosse 1876: 99, pl. 1, figs 4, 4a.

CURRENT TAXONOMIC STATUS. — Amastrinae, Amastra View in CoL (Amastrella Sykes, 1900). Valid species.

TYPE MATERIAL. — Lectotype (here designated) MNHN IM-2000- 30831; paralectotype: MNHN IM-2000-30832 (1 spm).

TYPE LOCALITY. — “l’île de Kauai (îles Hawaii)” (from article title).

REMARKS

Considered by Pease as a species of “ Hélictères ” (i.e. genus Helicteres , though the formal genus name was not used and it is therefore placed in square brackets above) in the subgenus Amastra (see introductory text regarding species of Pease). The original description was not explicitly based on only a single specimen but neither does it imply the existence of syntypes. The specimen illustrated by Crosse (1876: pl. 1, fig. 4, 4a) was listed by Fischer-Piette (1950: 149) as a measured “Exemplaire figuré”, which does not strictly constitute a lectotype designation, even though he also noted several fragmented “ paratypes ”. Johnson (1994: 23) referenced Fischer-Piette’s statement but credited him with having listed the “ Holotype ” as well as “fragment of paratype ”, while also noting additional “ paratypes ” (MCZ 45255). This also is not a lectotype designation (see introductory text regarding lectotypes). The original lot contained two specimens, one intact and one in three fragments; a label associated with it indicates that the specimens were received from Pease in 1869. The intact specimen (now separated from the original lot as MNHN IM-2000-30831), which is labeled as “Exemplaire fig.”, corresponds very closely in size to the illustration of Crosse (1876: pl. 1, figs 4, 4a) and to the measurement of 13 mm of Fischer-Piette (1950: 149), though the original description gave a height of 12 mm. It is therefore here designated as the lectotype, the broken specimen in the original lot becoming a paralectotype.