Helix lorata, Ferussac, 1825

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 : 251

lorata Férussac, 1825 , Helix

( Fig. 1E )

Helix lorata Férussac in Quoy & Gaimard, 1825: 479, pl. 68, figs 8-12.

Helix (Cochlogena) lorata Férussac, 1821a: 60 ; 1821b: 56 [nomen nudum].

CURRENT TAXONOMIC STATUS. — Achatinellinae, Achatinella (Achatinella) . Valid species.

TYPE MATERIAL. — Lectotype (here designated) MNHN IM-2000- 30808; paralectotype: MNHN IM-2000-30809 (1 spm).

NON- TYPE MATERIAL. — MNHN IM-2000-37356 (4 spms).

TYPE LOCALITY. — “les îles Sandwich”.

REMARKS

The text of Férussac in Quoy & Gaimard (1825: 479, 480) refers to pl. 65, in error (on p. 479), as well as to pl. 68, which is the correct plate (on p. 480). MNHN IM-2000-30808 closely matches Férussac’s fig. 12 and has been considered to be the figured specimen, according to the label, and the original lot from which it was separated. MNHN IM-2000- 30809 has a typical black-bordered Férussac collection label associated with it and is similar to his figs 8 and 9, although it is perhaps not the figured specimen. The species is extremely variable in the amount of banding on the shell, but Pilsbry & Cooke (1914 [in 1912-1914]: 279) took Férussac’s figs 10 and 11 to represent the “typical pattern”. In the absence of specimens of this typical pattern we here designate MNHN IM-2000-30808 as the lectotype ; MNHN IM-20000-30809 is a paralectotype. The species was treated and illustrated by Deshayes (1851: 193, 194, pl. 155, figs 9-11) .

The main modern label of MNHN IM-2012-37356 identifies the specimens as syntypes of Helix lorata . However, the older labels, both dated 1837 (after Férussac’s death), identify them as Achatinella producta Reeve, 1850 , though one of them also says “ Helix (Helicteres) lorata var.?” and has an additional label stuck to it also saying “ lorata var.?”. The modern identification of this lot as H. lorata is considered incorrect as the specimens match the original illustration of A. producta of Reeve (1850 [in 1849-1851]: pl. 2, fig. 13) quite closely, although they are slightly broader; they also match the illustrations of A. producta of Pilsbry & Cooke (1914: pl. 38, figs 7-13, pl. 43, figs 10-10b), especially their pl. 38, fig. 9. Reeve’s material was from the Cuming collection and described in 1850, whereas the MNHN labels indicate that the material was in Férussac’s collection, and with the date 1837. There is no earlier label suggesting that Férussac considered these specimens to be H lorata . We therefore do not consider these specimens to be type material of either H. lorata Férussac or of A. producta Reeve. They are discussed here simply to preclude confusion regarding their type status.

Figures

FIG. 1. — Achatinellidae Gulick, 1873: A, Tornatellina cincta Ancey, 1904, syntype MNHN IM-2000-20012, 3.8 mm, fig. 5 of Ancey (1904a); B, Helicter compta Pease, 1869, lectotype MNHN IM-2000-30805, 24.7 mm; C, Helix decora Férussac, 1821, possible syntype MNHN IM-2000-30806,18.0 mm, fig. 3015 of Chemnitz (1795); D, Auriculella expansa Pease,1868, lectotype MNHN IM-2000-30807, 6.4 mm, fig. 8 of Pease (1868); E, Helix lorata Férussac, 1825, lectotype MNHN IM-2000-30808, 14.2 mm, fig. 8 of Férussac in Quoy & Gaimard (1825); F, Helix lugubris Férussac, 1821, possible syntype MNHN IM-2000-30810, 17.2 mm, fig. 2062 of Chemnitz (1795). Scale bars: A, D, 1 mm; B, C, E, F, 10 mm. Dimensions given are shell height; reproductions of original illustrations not to scale.