Varioconus bruguieresi (Kiener, 1846) Tenorio & Abalde & Pardos-Blas & Cmim, 2020

Tenorio, Manuel J., Abalde, Samuel, Pardos-Blas, José R. & Zardoya, Rafael, 2020, Taxonomic revision of West African cone snails (Gastropoda: Conidae) based upon mitogenomic studies: implications for conservation, European Journal of Taxonomy 663 (663), pp. 1-89 : 63-65

Varioconus bruguieresi (Kiener, 1846) comb. nov.

Fig. 10E

Conus bruguieresi Kiener, 1846 : pl. 56, fig. 2.

Conus bruguieri Kiener 1849: 221 (incorrect subsequent spelling).

Conus bruguieresi – Monteiro et al. 2004: 31, pl. 38.

Material examined

Holotype (not examined)

The holotype was in the collection of Madame Dupont, its present whereabouts are unknown. The type locality was not stated, but was designated Dakar, Senegal by Coomans et al. (1982).

Other material

SENEGAL • 1 spec., 32.1 mm; Gorée Island , Dakar; 14º40ʹ16ʺ N, 17º23ʹ57ʺ W; 3 Jul. 2015; MNCN exped.; GenBank mitochondrion, partial genome: KY801852 ; MNCN 15.05/78497 ( Fig. 10E ) • 1 spec.; same collection data as for preceding; 3 Jul. 2015; MNCN exped.; GenBank mitochondrion, partial genome: KY801851 ; MNCN 15.05/78499 • 1 spec.; same collection data as for preceding; 3 Jul. 2015; MNCN exped.; GenBank mitochondrion, partial genome: KY801850 ; MNCN 15.05/78502 .

Geographical distribution

Dakar area, Senegal.

Conservation status in IUCN Red List

Endangered.

Remarks

This species is characterized by its elongated greenish shell. The name Conus bruguieresi was originally published on plate 56, fig. 2 by Kiener, ahead of the text, which appeared published in 1849. In the text, the name used for this taxon was Conus bruguieri , which was a misspelling leading to subsequent misinterpretations in the literature (e.g., Wagner & Abott 1978). Even though there was no description, the publication of the plate with a name (caption) on it is sufficient to make bruguieresi available as the earlier valid name for this taxon ( Coomans et al. 1982; Faber 2011). Varioconus bruguieresi is very closely related to its sister species V. echinophilus , up to the point that juvenile individuals of the former can not be discriminated based upon conchological features only.

Figures

Fig. 10 (opposite page). A. Conus ambiguus Reeve, 1844, neotype, 39.3 mm (NBC). B. Conus bellocqae van Rossum, 1996,paratype,60 mm(F.Gubbiolicoll.,Marbella, Spain).C. Monteiroconustabidus (Reeve, 1844), 33.6 mm (MNCN 15.05/78864). D. Conus belairensis Pin & Leung Tack in Pin, 1989, holotype, 36.7 mm (MNHN IM-2000-32668). E. Varioconus bruguieresi (Kiener, 1846) comb. nov., 32.1 mm (MNCN 15.05/78497). F. Varioconus cloveri (Walls, 1978) comb. nov., 23.2 mm (MNCN 15.05/78457). G. Varioconus echinophilus (Petuch, 1975b) comb. nov., 22.0. mm (MNCN 15.05/90430). H. Conus franciscanus Hwass in Bruguière, 1792, lectotype, 56.6 mm (MHNG-MOLL-52625). I. Varioconus franciscanus (Hwass in Bruguière, 1792) comb. nov., 53.6 mm (MNCN 15.05/78491). J. Varioconus franciscanus f. hybridus (Kiener, 1847), 40.0 mm (MNCN 15.05/78427). K. Conus guanche Lauer, 1993, holotype, 34.0 mm (MNHN IM-2000-2553). L. Conus guinaicus Hwass in Bruguière, 1792, lectotype, 43.0 mm (MHNG-MOLL-52638). M. Varioconus guinaicus (Hwass in Bruguière, 1792) comb. nov., 50.2 mm (MNCN 15.05/78443). N. Lautoconus wolof Petuch & Berschauer, 2018, holotype, 21.1 mm (MNHN IM-2000-34015). O. Conus pineaui Pin & Leung Tack in Pin, 1989, holotype, 28.7 mm (MNHN IM-2000-2528). P. Conus dorotheae Monnier & Limpalaër, 2010, holotype, 26.8 mm (MNHN IM-2009-8702). Scale bars = 10 mm.