Untitled

WORKING CLASSIFICATION OF THE GASTROPODA 277
substantiate its re-classification in the Ellobioidea. It is
even questionable whether the Cretaceous Chinese
fossils examined by Yu (1987) are really related to the
Jurassic Mesocochliopa from North America.
''33 Moitessieriidae given family rank after Wilke et al. (2001 ).
^^ Classification of Pomatiopsidae after Davis (1979 and
subsequent papers). The family-group name Rehderiellinae
Brandt, 1974 belongs in Pomatiopsidae but it has
not been possible to allocate it to one of the currently
recognized subfamilies
135 Classification after Ponder & Waren (1988)
^^ Classification of Aporrhaidae with data from Korotkov
(1992).
'3' Seraphsidae included in Strombidae by Wells (in
Beesleyetal., 1998).
138 Tylostomatidae placed in Stromboidea after Kollman et
al. (2003).
13^ Classification based on Waren & Bouchet (1990) with
emendations based on Beu (in Beesley et al., 1998).
For an alternative classification, see Bändel & Riedel
(1994b) and Riedel (1995a).
^'^ Contents and classification after Ponder & Waren (1 988)
and Ponder (1998).
"'' Hipponicidae placed in Calyptraeoidea by Bändel &
Riedel (1994b).
^'•2 The position of Omalaxidae is unsettled Because they
resemble planorboid architectonicids, they have been
placed near that family, but the resemblance is very
superficial. Based on the heterostrophy of the protoconch
of species of Anomalorbis. the family Omalaxidae
has been placed in the lower Heterobranchia.
However, the relationship between Anomalorbis and
Omalaxis is not clear. Lozouet (pers. comm.) notes a
resemblance of protoconch and teleoconch characters
with Lyocyclus, and the family Omalaxidae is here ten-
tatively included in Vanikoroidea.
"^ Classification after Ponder & Waren (1988), with adap-
tations from Schilder (1966a) for Triviidae.
i"*^ The position of the Vermetidae has been controversial.
However, sperm ultrastructure (Healy, 1988) and mo-
lecular data (e.g., Colgan et al. 2000) clearly show that
it belongs in the Littorinimorpha although placement in
the Cerithioidea still persist (e.g. Bändel & Kowaike,
1997; Kowaike, 1998; Bändel & Kiel, 2000). Lydeard et
al. (2002) found Campanile and Serpulorbis formed a
clade that was sister to the Cerithioidea but outgroup
sampling in this analysis was limited.
1"^ Allocation of fossil families to SPF questioned by Bändel
(1993b). Xenophoridae placed in Stromboidea by Kiel
&Perrilliat(2001).
^^ Considered paraphyletic or polyphyletic by Ponder &
Lindberg (1997).
'•*' Nystiellidae raised to family rank by Nützel (1998).
^'^^ The position of Aclididae, in Eulimoidea or Epitonioidea,
is uncertain. The protoconch and the presence of a
penis (at least in Costaclis) suggest a closer affinity to
Eulimidae than to Epitoniidae
''^^ Classiftcation partly based on Ponder & Waren (1988)
and Nützel (1998), partly original. For alternative clas-
sification, see Golikov & Starobogatov (1987).
150 Marshall (1980) has showed that dextral "Triforis" has
taenioglossate radula and argued that "Triforidae Jousseaume,
1 884" should be recognized as a separate fam-
ily. The name Triforis Deshayes, 1834 is an incorrect
subsequent spelling of Triphora Blainville, 1828 and "Tri-
foridae Jousseaume" is not an available name. For the
dextral species currently placed in Triforis, Trituba Jousseaume,
1884 is available. However, it is not clear
whether a new family-group name is necessary to classify
Trituba, and it is here tentatively placed in New-
toniellinae
'51 Little is known about Johnwyaíí/ayohnwafí/ Serna, 1979,
from the Paleocene of Colombia, and only known mem-
ber of the family It was described as a member of the
Conoidea but Sysoev (pers. comm.) suggests it is more
likely a member of the Buccinoidea.
'52 Perissityidae included in Tonnoidea by Tracey et al.
(1993).
'53 The families Sarganidae and Pholidotomidae [as
Pyrifusidae] are united by Bändel & Dockery (2001 ) in
a separate superfamily "Pyrifusoidea". Bändel (1999)
suggested that this and Moreinae were stem groups of
the Naticoidea.
'5^ The family Spelghtiidae is traditionally classified near
the "Turridae", but Tracey et al. (1993) noted that "some
if not all of the speightiids may prove to belong in the
Fasciolariidae".
155 Buccinoidea is recognised following Harasewych et al.
(1997) and Riedel (2000).
156 Classification of Buccinidae after Kantor (pers. comm.).
15'' Busyconinae ranked as a subfamily of Buccinidae after
Kosyan & Kantor (in press), while Melongenidae stand
out as a distinct family.
'58 Classification of Columbellidae after Radwin (1977).
153 Classification of Fasciolariidae after Snyder (2003).
"^ Classification of Nassariidae after Alimón (1990).
161 Coralliophilinae given subfamily status within Muncidae
after Oliverio & Mariottini (2001 ).
1^2 Babyloniidae ranked as family after Harasewych &
Kantor (2002). Three family-group names are older than
Babyloniidae. Swainson based his concept of Eburninae
on species of Babylonia, but he misidentified Eburna,
the type species of which belongs to the family Olividae;