Pseudotuba badensis (Sacco, 1895)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5370.1.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:48903495-7C6C-46E4-9B1B-D6A2F2781873 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10580829 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BEE17B-FFF8-C05F-FF0E-FA1C7D09330D |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Pseudotuba badensis (Sacco, 1895) |
status |
|
Pseudotuba badensis (Sacco, 1895) View in CoL
Figs 29A–E View FIGURE 29
Litorina [sic] sulcata Ĥrnes 1856: 685 View in CoL , pl. 49, fig. 27 [non Pilkington 1804].
* [ Tuba sulcata] var. badensis Sacco —Sacco 1895: 39.
Tuba sulcata (Pilk.) View in CoL — Boettger 1902: 156 [non Pilkington 1804].
Tuba sulcata pedemontana Sacco — Csepreghy-Meznerics 1956: 432 [non Sacco 1895].
Gegania sulcata pedemontana Sacco, 1895 —Strausz 1966: 114, pl. 13, figs 10–12 [non Sacco 1895].
Holotype. NHMW 2010 View Materials /0004/0681, SL: 13.4 mm, MD: 9.4 mm, Baden ( Austria), illustrated in Ĥrnes (1856, pl. 49, fig. 27). The specimens seems to be lost.
Illustrated material. NHMW 2010/0004/0681a, SL: 11.6 mm, MD: 8.5 mm, Bad Vöslau ( Austria), Figs 29A View FIGURE 29 1 –A View FIGURE 1 2 View FIGURE 2 . NHMW 2010/0004/0681b, SL: 11.8 mm, MD: 8.9 mm, Bad Vöslau ( Austria), Figs 29B View FIGURE 29 1 –B View FIGURE 1 2 View FIGURE 2 . NHMW 2010/0004/0681c, SL: 11.0 mm, MD: 8.0 mm, Bad Vöslau ( Austria), Figs 29C View FIGURE 29 1 –C View FIGURE 1 2 View FIGURE 2 . NHMW 2013/0078/0105a, SL: 11.4 mm, MD: 8.3 mm, Baden ( Austria), Fig. 29D View FIGURE 29 . NHMW 2010/0004/0681, SL: 11.4 mm, MD: 8.5 mm, Bad Vöslau ( Austria), Fig. 29E View FIGURE 29 .
Additional material. 3 spec., NHMW 2013 View Materials /0078/0105, Baden ( Austria) ; 3 spec., NHMW 2010 View Materials /0004/0454 , Bad Vöslau ( Austria).
Revised description. Medium-sized, solid, turbiniform shell, with slightly gradate spire; apical angle ~60°. Protoconch hyperstrophic, deeply immersed in first teleoconch whorl. Teleoconch of four convex whorls with incised suture. Rounded periphery about one-third whorl height. First teleoconch whorl with six narrow, close-set, convex spiral cords crossed by numerous much weaker axial lamellae forming fine, dense cancellate pattern, with small, rounded beads at intersections. Beaded secondary spiral cord intercalated between adapical pair of primary cords on later whorls and seventh spiral cord appears close to abapical suture. Last whorl globular with up to nine spiral cords; base poorly delimited, somewhat flattened, weakly convex. Six further cords over base, of similar strength and spacing as above base. Umbilicus narrow, peribasal cord slightly strengthened in some specimens. Aperture subcircular. Columella concave with broad rim. No parietal callus. Outer lip thin. Numerous spiral lirae deep in aperture, not visible in intact apertures.
Discussion. Several Miocene species have been described. However, specimens seem to be rare in all their respective assemblages, and thus intraspecific variability is poorly understood. Nevertheless, Paratethyan specimens show little variability in shape and sculpture. Pseudotuba cancellata ( Grateloup, 1828) , from the Langhian of France, differs from P. badensis in its broad conical outline, the narrower spiral cords, the densely spaced growth lines, and the wider umbilicus (see Cossmann & Peyrot 1922: 179, pl. 3, figs 35–36; Figs 29F View FIGURE 29 1 –F View FIGURE 1 4 View FIGURE 4 ). Pseudotuba cancellata sensu Moths et al. (2010: pl. 45, fig. 6), from the Hemmoorian of the North Sea Basin, is very close to the Paratethyan species, and differs mainly in its narrow spiral cords. Pseudotuba pedemontana Sacco, 1895 , from the Burdigalian of the Colli Torinesi ( Italy), and P. bellardii (d’Orbigny, 1852) , from the Tortonian of the Po Basin ( Italy), both differ from T. badensis in their predominant spiral sculpture and higher spires (see Sacco 1895: pl. 25, figs 53–54). ‘Tuba’ bearnensis Cossmann & Peyrot, 1922, from the Serravallian of France, differs in its conical spire and the ovoid aperture, and is most probably not a Mathildidae (see Cossmann & Peyrot 1922: 179, pl. 3, figs 37–38).
Sacco (1895: 38) mentioned the specimens described by Ĥrnes (1856) in his discussion on Tuba sulcata , stating: “ ed infatti l’Hoernes, paragonando gli esemplari tortoniani di Baden con quella eocenici di Barton, li trovò identici fin nei più minuti dettagli ” [and in fact Hoernes, comparing the Tortonian specimens of Baden with the Eocene one of Barton, found them identical down to the smallest details]. Therefore, although he gave ‘ tortoniani’ and ‘ eocenici’ in italics, Sacco (1895) obviously did not aim to establish these names as varieties or subspecies.
Paleoenvironment. The occurrence in the Baden Formation suggests middle to outer neritic water depths ( Kranner et al. 2021).
Distribution. Known so far only from the middle Badenian (late Langhian) of the Central Paratethys Sea.
Central Paratethys Sea. Middle Miocene (Badenian): Vienna Basin: Baden, Bad Vöslau ( Austria) (Hörnes 1856; hoc opus); Pannonian Basin: Szob ( Hungary (Strausz 1966); Făget Basin: Coşteiu de Sus ( Romania) ( Boettger 1902).
NHMW |
Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
SubClass |
Heterobranchia |
Order |
|
SuperFamily |
Mathildoidea |
Family |
|
Genus |
Pseudotuba badensis (Sacco, 1895)
Harzhauser, Mathias & Landau, Bernard 2023 |
Tuba sulcata pedemontana
Csepreghy-Meznerics, I. 1956: 432 |
Tuba sulcata (Pilk.)
Boettger, O. 1902: 156 |