Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi Pereira da Costa 1866
Creators: name: Psarras, Christos
name: Merle, Didier
name: Koskeridou, Efterpi
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2022
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Mollusca
Gastropoda
Neogastropoda
Conidae
Conus
Conus eschewegi

description: Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi Pereira da Costa, 1866
Figs 2–3, 20, 40A; Table 1
Conus Eschewegi Pereira da Costa, 1866: 29, pl. 9 figs 18, 19a–b, 21, 23a–b (non figs 20, 22, 34).
Chelyconus taurorectus Sacco, 1893b: 67, pl. 6 fig. 35. Syn. nov.
Lautoconus quaqqaoides Harzhauser & Landau, 2016: 88–89, figs 17d, 20e–j. Syn. nov.
Conus (Dendroconus) subraristriatus – Hoernes & Auinger 1879: 23 (partim), pl. 1 fig. 20 (non Conus (Lautoconus) subraristriatus Pereira da Costa, 1866).
[Conus] D.[endroconus] Eschewegi var. caelata – Sacco 1893a: 13, pl. 1 fig. 24.
[Conus] D.[endroconus] Eschewegi var. depressoastensis – Sacco 1893a: 13, pl. 1 fig. 25.
Dendroconus pyruloides – Sacco 1893a: 13, pl. 1 fig. 26. — Ferrero-Mortara et al. 1984: 102, pl. 15 figs 9a–b, pl. 16 figs 7a–b.
Chelyconus deshayesi var. mioantiqua – Sacco 1893b: pl. 7 fig. 18. (non Conus deshayesi Bellardi & Michelotti, 1841).
Chelyconus taurorectus – Ferrero-Mortara et al. 1984: 117, pl. 8 fig. 4.
Conus taurorectus – Hall 1966: 161, pl. 20 figs 8, 13.
Conus (Chelyconus) enzesfeldensis – Symeonidis & Konstantinidis 1968: 671, pl. 7 fig. 17 (non Conus (Lautoconus) enzesfeldensis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879).
Conus eschewegi – Davoli 1972: 107, pl. 6 figs 1–16. — Muñiz Solís 1999: 73, fig. 9c–e.
Chelyconus rotundus – Kovács & Vicián 2013: 61, fig. 16 (non Conus (Lautoconus) rotundus Hoernes & Auinger, 1879).
Lautoconus belus – Kovács & Vicián 2013: 68, figs 4, 53–55 (non Conus (Lautoconus) belus d’Orbigny, 1852).
Lautoconus eschewegi – Kovács & Vicián 2013: 70, fig. 7.
Lautoconus pyrula – Kovács & Vicián 2013: 71, figs 7, 62–65 (non Conus (Lautoconus) pyrula Brocchi, 1814).
Varioconus pelagicus – Landau et al. 2013: 247–248, pl. 82 fig. 1a–b.
non Lautoconus eschewegi – Kovács & Vicián 2013: figs 56–61 (misidentification).
non Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi – Harzhauser & Landau 2016: 76–77, figs 3v, 16a1–a2, 16b1–b3, 16c1–c2, 16d1–d2 (misidentification).
Type locality
Cacela Basin, Portugal (Tortonian).
Type material
Specimen illustrated by Pereira da Costa (1866: pl. 9 fig. 23a–b), selected as “ lectotype ” proposed by Sacco (1893a) [perciò la specie del Da Costa si doveva o abolire o restringere in limiti più definiti, come io credetti di fare ponendone a tipo la fig. 23]. Collection whereabouts are unknown (Harzhauser & Landau 2016).
Material examined
GREECE – Crete • 5 specs; Filippi; 35.035° N, 25.250° E; Efterpi Koskeridou leg.; AMPG(IV) 3694 to AMPG(IV) 3698 • 5 specs; Filippi; 35.035° N, 25.250° E; Nikolaos Symeonidis leg.; AMPG(IV) 3701 to AMPG(IV) 3705 • 2 specs; Filippi; 35.035° N, 25.250° E; 2017; Christos Psarras leg.; AMPG(IV) 3706 to AMPG(IV) 3707 • 2 specs; Achladhia; 1964; Nikolaos Symeonidis leg.; AMPG(IV) 3699 to AMPG(IV) 3700 • 2 specs; Partira; AMPG(IV) 3708 to AMPG(IV) 3709 • 5 specs; Tefeli; Efterpi Koskeridou leg.; AMPG(IV) 3710 to AMPG(IV) 3714 • 8 specs; 1990; Action spécifique du Muséum project (1989–1990) exped.; MNHN.F. A82973 to MNHN.F. A82980 • 1 spec.; Adhraktia; 1990; Action spécifique du Muséum project (1989–1990) exped.; MNHN.F. A82981.
Shell description
Small-medium-sized (SL: 39.57 mm) and elongated shell, with straight to cyrtoconoid spire outline. Spire convex, conical of variable height, ranging from nearly flat to low conical. Early spire whorls straight, striated. Late spire whorls convex, with impressed suture. Subsutural flexure very shallow, weakly curved, moderately asymmetrical (Fig. 40A). Shoulder rounded, with maximum diameter varying in position, from near shoulder to one fourth posterior part of last whorl. Last whorl slightly inflated. Aperture straight to slightly curved, widening considerably towards fasciole. Siphonal canal wide, straight. Fasciole twisted, slightly inflated in larger specimens. Spiral cords present along the anterior part of last whorl.
Description of colour pattern
The colour pattern on spire whorls consists of periodical, irregularly shaped dashes, sometimes parallel to the direction of shell growth. The colour pattern on the rest of the shell consists of spiral rows of fluorescent dashes, demarcated by non-fluorescent areas. Faintly fluorescent blotches appearing sporadically in some shells, surrounding the dashes and connecting axially arranged spiral dashes. Axially arranged spiral dashes tending to form vertical, diagonal, or zigzag axial formations (Fig. 3). Occasionally, a hint of a non-fluorescent band on middle whorl height, engulfing a spiral line of short dashes (seen clearly on Fig. 2E).
Remarks
The Cretan specimens differ from the other species of Conus (Lautoconus) herein, in the relatively slender morphology (Table 1), the low angled spire and the exquisite colour pattern of delicate spiral rows of dashes. We argue that the morphological variability recorded in the studied material is likely due to the different overall shape during development, with larger specimens having a more robust outline. Small specimens which are more elongated, could be interpreted as Lautoconus pyruloides (Sacco, 1893a) (Ferrero Mortara et al. 1984: pl. 15 fig. 9, pl. 16 fig. 7), but past researchers assigned them to Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi (Hall 1966; Davoli 1972). In Greece, specimens studied by Symeonidis & Konstantinidis (1968) were assigned to Conus enzesfeldensis Hoernes & Auinger, 1879, a species considered a junior synonym of Conus (Lautoconus) subraristriatus Pereira da Costa, 1866. It is easily differentiated from the Cretan specimens, both in the morphology of its narrower shoulder and the different colour pattern of the widely spaced, continuous, narrow, spiral rows of dots and dashes (e.g., Harzhauser & Landau 2016). Harzhauser & Landau (2016) regarded Spanish Pliocene specimens described from Estepona (Muniz Solís, 1999) as Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi Pereira da Costa, 1866. We disagree on that statement because Muñiz Solís’ specimen (Muñiz Solís 1999: fig. 9c–e) and the Cretan specimens (Fig. 2F–G) have very similar morphologies. Harzhauser & Landau (2016) mentioned that Pereira da Costa had a “much too broad species concept”. We disagree with that statement as well, because in the Cretan specimens there is also a spectrum of variability in morphology, with smooth to slightly angulated shoulder, flat to inflated spire whorls and a conical to concave spire. This variation has also been shown in specimens of Davoli (1972: pl. 6 figs 1–16), indicating a wide morphological variation for this species.
Furthermore, in Davoli (1972: pl. 6 figs 1a–b, 11) the colour pattern is figured as spirally arranged, elongated dashes. Kovács & Vicián (2013) reported three species, Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866), Lautoconus belus (d’Orbigny, 1852) and Lautoconus pyrula (Brocchi, 1814), from the middle Miocene of the Paratethys at Letkés (Hungary). These specimens are in fact conspecific (Harzhauser & Landau 2016). Additionally, they have a colour pattern variation of densely arranged rows of equally spaced, densely packed, short dashes (Kovács & Vicián 2013: figs 55–58, 62–65), a pattern different from the Cretan specimens and Davoli’s (1972). Harzhauser & Landau (2016) identified those specimens as Lautoconus eschewegi (Pereira da Costa, 1866), but we consider the specimens in Kovács & Vicián (2013) as well as those of Harzhauser & Landau (2016: fig. 16c–d) to belong to another species, with a similar morphology as Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi but with different colour pattern variations.
Hall (1966: pl. 20 figs 8, 13) mentioned Conus (Lautoconus) taurorectus Sacco, 1893b, a specimen from the collection of Sacco as Conus deshayesi var. mioantiqua (figured in Sacco 1893b: pl. 7 fig. 18), which shows a similar RD (≈ 0.74) (measured directly from Hall’s figure 1966: pl. 20 fig. 13) and a similarly faint colour pattern to Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi. We consider that specimen as a large-sized Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi. Therefore, the lectotype figured by Hall (1966) and Ferrero Mortara (1984) (fixation of the lectotype (MRSN BS.038.05.052, Sacco coll.) by inference of ‘holotype’ (ICZN 1999: Art. 74.6) by Hall (1966: 161) is considered a junior synonym of Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi.
This species is related to Conus (Lautoconus) quaqqaoides Harzhauser & Landau, 2016, as both display similar colour patterns and an overall shell outline. The zig-zag patterns described (Harzhauser & Landau 2016: fig. 20h–j) are visible on some Cretan shells as well. The Greek specimens differ in the relatively higher spire whorls, a more inflated last whorl, straight aperture, as well as a shallower and less curved subsutural flexure. These differences, however, are minor and could be interpreted as different morphotypes of one species. Davoli’s figures show a morphotype of Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi, which is very similar to that of Conus (Lautoconus) quaqqaoides (Davoli 1972: pl. 5 figs 13, 16). Since both morphs are similar and present in Davoli’s work (1972), we consider Conus (Lautoconus) quaqqaoides Harzhauser & Landau, 2016 as a junior synonym of Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi. Landau et al. (2013: pl. 82 fig. 1) named a specimen as Lautoconus pelagicus (Brocchi, 1814), which is identical to the Cretan specimens. Additionally, the colour pattern of the Paratethyan Conus (Lautoconus) pelagicus described by Harzhauser & Landau (2016) is much different from that of the Turkish specimen of Landau et al. (2013). For this reason, we consider that Landau et al. ’s specimen (2013) is not conspecific with the Paratethyan Conus (Lautoconus) pelagicus and most likely belongs to Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi. The Mediterranean Conus (Lautoconus) pelagicus possibly possesses a similar colour pattern as Conus (Lautoconus) eschewegi, as inferred by the specimen of Chelyconus pelagicus var. astensinflata Sacco, 1893b, which shows a dashed pattern and no zonation (MRSN BS03805143, Annalaura Pistarino pers. comm.). More work needs to be done on the Italian Conidae using UV light to clarify the confusion. The Messinian fragment of Davoli (2003), named as Conus eschewegi, needs verification under UV light as it could belong to a different species.
Conus (Lautoconus) steindachneri Hoernes, 1879 is also a species similar to the Cretan specimens. Harzhauser & Landau (2016) described a colour pattern of spiral lines or long spiral dashes, very similar to the studied material. Furthermore, some of the adult Cretan specimens (Fig. 2B) show a similarity in morphology, but Conus (Lautoconus) steindachneri has a relatively wider shoulder width (Conus (Lautoconus) steindachneri RD = 0.72; Harzhauser & Landau 2016) and a deeper, strongly asymmetrical subsutural flexure. The Hungarian Conus (Lautoconus) steindachneri from Kovács & Balázs (2015: figs 91–92) are not similar to the Cretan specimens, as they have a very wide and slightly angulated shoulder.
The Pliocene Conus deshayesi Bellardi & Michelotti, 1841 has a similar morphology, but the colour pattern illustrated in Bellardi & Michelotti (1841) consists of densely spaced spiral rows of dashes, unlike the studied specimens.
Stratigraphic range
Burdigalian of Italy (Hall 1966); Langhian of Paratethys (Pannonian Basin) (Kovács & Vicián 2013; Harzhauser & Landau 2016); Serravalian of Turkey (Karaman Basin) (Landau et al. 2013); Tortonian of Portugal (Cacela Velha) (Pereira da Costa 1866), Italy (Po Basin) (Sacco 1893a; Davoli 1972) and Greece (Messara Basin) (Symeonidis & Kostantinidis 1968; this work); Pliocene of Spain (Estepona) (Muñiz Solís 1999). Reports from the Messinian (Davoli 2003) and Pliocene (Davoli 1972) of the Mediterranean are in need of confirmation.
description: Published as part of Psarras, Christos, Merle, Didier & Koskeridou, Efterpi, 2022, Late Miocene Conidae (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of Crete (Greece). Part 2, pp. 1-70 in European Journal of Taxonomy 816 on pages 6-10, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2022.816.1747, http://zenodo.org/record/6484261