search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
822


Journal of Paleontology 92(5):804–837


profile. Shoulder angulate or subangulate; smooth. Widest part of shell at or just below shoulder. Aperture uniform in width from base to shoulder. Siphonal notch absent. Spiral grooves present on anterior third of last whorl. Spire whorls.—Spire moderate (RSH 0.20–0.21; x=0:21;


N=2); outline concave. Protoconch unknown. The apex of the holotype is broken, but may record evidence of a single weakly tuberculate postnuclear whorl; similarly, the eroded apex of UF 224823 appears to show evidence of several weakly tuberculate early postnuclear whorls. Early whorls strongly stepped; later whorls weakly stepped. Sutural ramp sigmoidal to nearly convex; weak spiral striae present. Sutural groove pre- sent. Subsutural flexure asymmetrical (ASSF 0.4–0.6, x=0:5, N=3), depth less than width (DWSSF 0.5–0.7, x=0:7, N=3) (Fig. 9.5).


Coloration pattern.—Two noninteracting patterns present;


these differ slightly in the color of emitted light. The primary (base) pattern consists of irregularly shaped axial blotches in UF 256543 (Fig. 9.6, 9.7; specimen from UF locality 5299), but in UF 271020 (Fig. 9.8) and UF 224823 (Fig. 9.9) consists of spirally arranged dots and spots, which are sometimes sub- triangular in shape. The secondary pattern consists of a con- tinuous (UF 224823 and UF 256543) or nearly continuous (UF 271020) spiral band at the midline of the last whorl; UF 224823 shows evidence of a second continuous spiral band that covers the anterior third of the shell. The coloration pattern of the anterior half of the last whorl is unknown. Sutural ramp with irregular blotches.


Materials.—Holotype: USNM 645748 (Fig. 9.1–9.5). Other material: two specimens from UF locality YN020 (UF 224823, UF 271020) and one from UF locality 5299 (UF 256543).


Remarks.—Prior to this study, the only known specimen of Conus taphrus was Woodring’s (1970) holotype. Woodring (1970, p. 354) considered the holotype’s “sutural channel” to be “a distinctive feature.” While none of the three newly recog- nized specimens ofC. taphrus possesses a sutural channel that is as well developed as that of the holotype, they are otherwise consistent with it in other aspects of shell form. The holotype reveals no evidence of its coloration pattern under UV light, but the new specimens fluoresce strongly, showing some variability in their primary and secondary patterns. Pending discovery of additional specimens, this is assumed to represent intraspecific variability. Among co-occurring species, C. taphrus can only be


mistaken for Conasprella imitator (Brown and Pilsbry, 1911). While coloration patterns revealed by UV light readily separate the two species, other differences in shell morphology are less distinctive. Both species have sigmoidal last whorl profiles, but the curves are more pronounced in Conasprella imitator, which also has a more angulate shoulder. The subsutural flexure of Conasprella imitator (DWSSF x=1:0) is also deeper than that of Conus taphrus (DWSSF x=0:7). Conus taphrus is similar to the extant western Atlantic


species C. daucus Hwass in Bruguière, 1792 and C. amphiurgus Dall, 1889, which, while not closely related to one another, are both members of the Dauciconus clade (Puillandre et al., 2014, 2015). Kohn (2014) recently revised both of these extant taxa.


His figured specimens of each species exhibit a large amount of variability in coloration pattern, but the basic elements of their patterns (e.g., a primary pattern consisting of axial and/or spiral elements overlain by a secondary pattern of bands) are broadly consistent with the pattern described here for C. taphrus. Other features of the shell form of C. taphrus are also generally consistent with C. daucus and C. amphiurgus. Perhaps most notably, Kohn (2014, p. 228) stated that the early whorls of C. daucus exhibit a “prominent suture,” which is one of the most diagnostic features of C. taphrus. While knowledge of C. taphrus will improve with


discovery of additional, better-preserved specimens, the known shell features of this species are similar enough to extant taxa such asC. daucus andC. amphiurgus to assign the species to the subgenus Dauciconus. Tucker and Tenorio (2009) included C. taphrus in a listing of fossil species that they considered to belong to the genus Gradiconus da Motta, 1991. Puillandre et al. (2015) synonymized Gradiconus with the diverse subgenus Dauciconus Cotton, 1945. This adds further support to the opinion here that C. taphrus belongs in the Dauciconus clade, even if determination of its position within Dauciconus requires additional specimens and study.


Conus?(Dauciconus?) multiliratus Böse, 1906 Figure 10.1–10.18


1906 Conus agassizi var. multiliratus Böse, p. 49, pl. 5, figs. 34–38.


1917 Conus gaza; Maury, p. 210, pl. 7, fig. 12. 1921 Conus gaza; Pilsbry, p. 330. 1970 Conus multiliratus multiliratus; Woodring, p. 356, pl. 57, figs. 3, 4.


1911 Conus gaza Johnson and Pilsbry in Brown and Pilsbry, p. 342, pl. 23, figs. 2, 3.


1993 Conus multiliratus multiliratus; Pitt and Pitt, p. 12, pl. 4, fig. 3.


2009 Conasprelloides multiliratus (Böse); Tucker and Tenorio, p. 88.


2015 Conus (Dauciconus) multiliratus; Hendricks, p. 46, fig. 22a–e.


Holotype.—IGM(no known catalog number), Tuxtepec, Oaxaca Province,Mexico (stratum unknown);Woodring (1970) reported the specimen as missing and this remained the case as of 2010 (M.d.C. Perrilliat, personal communication, September 14, 2010).


Occurrence.—Woodring (1970) presented Böse’s (1906) type locality at Tuxtepec as middle Miocene, but its exact stratigraphic position is not known. In the Panama Canal Zone, Conus multi- liratus spans the lower to upper Gatun Formation (Woodring, 1970). Recently, Hendricks (2015) reported the species from the early Pliocene Gurabo Formation of the Dominican Republic. Additional occurrences come from the Bocas del Toro area of Panama (Limón Formation), Colombia, Jamaica (Bowden For- mation), and the Dominican Republic (Cercado Formation) (Woodring, 1970), but these require confirmation.


Description.—Maximum shell size: moderately small. Largest observed specimen from YN020 (UF 270996; Fig. 10.8) has SL


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180  |  Page 181  |  Page 182  |  Page 183  |  Page 184  |  Page 185  |  Page 186  |  Page 187  |  Page 188  |  Page 189  |  Page 190  |  Page 191  |  Page 192  |  Page 193  |  Page 194  |  Page 195  |  Page 196  |  Page 197  |  Page 198  |  Page 199  |  Page 200  |  Page 201  |  Page 202  |  Page 203  |  Page 204  |  Page 205  |  Page 206  |  Page 207