A nomenclator of extant and fossil taxa of the Melanopsidae (Gastropoda, Cerithioidea)

Thomas Neubauer

doi:10.3897/zookeys.602.8136

Catalogue

A nomenclator of extant and fossil taxa of the Melanopsidae (Gastropoda, Cerithioidea)

Thomas A. Neubauer^‡

‡ Natural History Museum Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Corresponding author: Thomas Neubauer ( thomas.neubauer@nhm-wien.ac.at )

Academic editor: Thierry Backeljau

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Citation: Neubauer TA (2016) A nomenclator of extant and fossil taxa of the Melanopsidae (Gastropoda, Cerithioidea). ZooKeys 602: 1-358. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.602.8136

ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:65EFA276-7345-4AC6-9B78-DBE7E98D6103

Abstract

This nomenclator provides details on all published names in the family-, genus-, and species-group, as well as for a few infrasubspecific names introduced for, or attributed to, the family Melanopsidae. It includes nomenclaturally valid names, as well as junior homonyms, junior objective synonyms, nomina nuda, common incorrect subsequent spellings, and as far as possible discussion on the current status in taxonomy. The catalogue encompasses three family-group names, 79 genus-group names, and 1381 species-group names. All of them are given in their original combination and spelling (except mandatory corrections requested by the Code), along with their original source. For each family- and genus-group name, the original classification and the type genus and type species, respectively, are given. Data provided for species-group taxa are type locality, type horizon (for fossil taxa), and type specimens, as far as available.

Keywords

Non-marine snails, catalogue, nomenclature, taxonomy, www-references

Introduction

The family Melanopsidae (Caenogastropoda: Cerithioidea) is one of the most diverse groups of non-marine gastropods in Earth history (Strong et al. 2008). Today, the family occurs in southern to eastern Europe, northern Africa, and the Middle East, as well as New Zealand and some south Pacific islands (Bănărescu 1990, Glaubrecht 1993, 1996, Altaba 1998, Strong et al. 2008). Its record dates back at least into the late Cretaceous of Europe (Bandel 2000, Neubauer et al. 2016a). While the fossil record of New Zealand species is fairly restricted, the record for Europe, northern Africa and the Middle East yielded many hundreds of species-group taxa. Early species were pure brackish-water dwellers, which they remained until the early Miocene, when they started to conquer freshwater (Glaubrecht 1996, Neubauer et al. 2016a). This change in life style coincided with a series of adaptive radiations in the middle and late Miocene, producing hundreds of species, and forming the basis for the modern clades and present diversity and distribution (Neubauer et al. 2016a).

The first detailed listing of names of living “Melanidae” – at that time the Melanopsidae were considered a subfamily of that group – was published by Brot (1874–1879). Soon later, Bourguignat (1884) followed with his “Histoire des mélaniens du système européen”, in which he described numerous new species, but few of them are currently still accepted. Pallary (1926a, b) provided a list of all published names of fossil and recent Melanopsidae, yet without any comments. Wenz (1929) summarized all Cenozoic (Paleocene–Pleistocene) names and gave extensive synonymy lists. Besides, there are papers on the fossil and recent Melanopsidae of Italy (Pantanelli 1886b) and Spain (Pallary 1924, Azpeitia Moros 1929). In addition, Pallary (1916a, b, 1920, 1925) provided a detailed account of nomenclatural mistakes concerning this family and introduced a great many of replacement names for existing homonyms.

A comprehensive annotated list of melanopsid names is, however, entirely missing. This catalogue presents information for all published names in the family-, genus- and species-group, as well as for a few infrasubspecific names. Discussed are nomenclaturally valid, invalid (e.g., junior objective synonyms, junior homonyms) and unavailable names (e.g., nomina nuda, misspellings), following the rules of the fourth edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999, henceforth referred to as “the Code”), incorporating later added amendments (see http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/index.jsp). To facilitate comparison, the general outline of the present work follows the excellent nomenclator of Valvatidae by Haszprunar (2014).

Part I: Supraspecific taxa in Melanopsidae

The supraspecific phylogenetic relationships within the Melanopsidae are poorly resolved (Strong et al. 2011). Most of the subfamilies, genera and subgenera were established for particular morphological characteristics, most of which have been later shown to be highly variable and, moreover, polyphyletic (e.g., Neubauer et al. 2014a). Few of them are currently used in taxonomy.

The fossil Stomatopsinae Stache, 1889 (type genus: Stomatopsis Stache in Sandberger, 1871), originally introduced as subfamily of the “Melaniidae” (although Stache 1889 used the suffix “-idae”) but considered as a junior synonym of the Melanopsidae by Bouchet and Rocroi (2005: 248), are not included here. Their systematic position is highly uncertain and requires a more detailed re-examination.

Cossmann 1909: 183.

Original classification

Section of Melanopsis.

Type species

† Melanoptychia paradoxa Brusina, 1892, by original designation.

Cossmann 1889: 1101.

Type species

† Melanopsis pygmaea Hörnes, 1856, by original designation.

Remarks

Established as a substitute name for Homalia Handmann, 1887, which Cossmann (1899), despite being aware of the difference, treated as a junior homonym of “Homala Schumacher” (actually Omala Schumacher, 1817, unjustified emendation to “Homala” by Agassiz 1847).

Holandriana Bourguignat, 1884

Original source

Remarks

Junior homonym of Hyphantria Harris, 1841 (Lepidoptera).

Bourguignat 1884: 75.

Original classification

Subgenus of Melanopsis.

Type species

Melanopsis letourneuxi Bourguignat, 1884, by monotypy.

Remarks

Junior homonym of Letourneuxiana Silva e Castro, 1883 (Unionidae).

Locardiana Bourguignat, 1884

Original source

Type species

Melanopsis lortetiana Locard, 1883, by tautonymy.

Lyrcea H. Adams & A. Adams, 1854

Original source

Adams and Adams 1853–1858: 310.

Original classification

Subgenus of Melanopsis.

Type species

Melanopsis dufourii Férussac, 1822, by subsequent designation by Cossmann (1909: 174).

Remarks

“Lyrcaea” as mentioned in Wenz (1929: 2647) and many other authors is an incorrect subsequent spelling.

Bourguignat 1884: 49.

Original classification

Genus of Melaniidae (note that Bourguignat actually only gave the vernacular “Mélaniens”).

Type species

Melanopsis acicularis Férussac, 1823, by subsequent designation by Cossmann (1909: 159).

Remarks

“Microcalpia” as mentioned in Fischer (1886: 705) is an incorrect subsequent spelling.

Remarks

Replacement name for Martinia Handmann, 1887, non M’Coy in M’Coy & Griffith, 1844. Junior homonym of Pannonia Dollfus, 1912 (see Battistiana).

Parreyssiana Bourguignat, 1884

Original source

Type species

Melanopsis esperi Férussac, 1823, by original designation.

Remarks

Junior objective synonym of Esperiana Bourguignat, 1876, with the same type species.

† Pseudofagotia Anistratenko, 1993

Original source

Finlay 1926: 380, 476.

Type species

Melanopsis trifasciata Gray, 1843, by original designation.

Part II: Species-group and infrasubspecific names

The number of living melanopsid species-group taxa accepted in taxonomy today ranges between 25 and 50 (Strong et al. 2008); the IUCN Red List includes 36 species. Fossil species are far more numerous, with over 450 accepted names (Neubauer et al. 2016a). Beyond that, a plethora of homonyms and synonyms have been described in the Melanopsidae. The catalogue includes taxa initially described in this family and subsequently classified in other families and vice versa. It comprises a total of 1381 names, of which 71 are unavailable (mostly nomina nuda), 252 are available but invalid (junior homonyms and junior objective synonyms) and 15 are unresolved (requiring the action of a First Reviser).

Not treated by the present work are taxa not described for, and currently not considered to belong to, the Melanopsidae but classified therein previously. In the 19^th century, many species introduced in the group that nowadays is understood as the family Melanopsidae, especially regarding varieties of Holandriana holandrii (Pfeiffer, 1828), have been classified within the genus Melania Lamarck, 1799 (e.g., Rossmässler 1838–1844, Brusina 1866, Kobelt 1881, Westerlund 1886, 1898). In order to avoid mixing with “real” Melania (which is a junior objective synonym of Thiara Röding, 1798, the type species of the family Thiaridae), only such Melania species-group taxa attributed to the Holandriana holandrii species-complex, or those that have been claimed to be related to that group, are included herein. Further taxa that are not included are: species introduced within the genera Faunus Montfort, 1810, Hemisinus Swainson, 1840, Dicolpus Philippi, 1887 [invalid: junior homonym of Dicolpus Gerstaecker, 1884 (Insecta)], Loxotrema Gabb, 1868, and Boggsia Olsson, 1929 that have been occasionally classified in the Melanopsidae (e.g., Brot 1874–1879, Cossmann 1909, Squires 1998, 1999, Squires and Saul 1997) but are not considered to belong there today; the Bullia (Bulliopsis) species described by Conrad (1830, 1862) from middle Miocene deposits of Maryland, USA (B. integra Conrad, 1862, B. marylandica Conrad, 1862, and B. quadrata Conrad, 1830) that he later considered melanopsids (Conrad 1866) but which belong to the marine Nassariidae after Allmon (1990); Paleocene species of the Stomatopsinae Stache, 1889 (genera Stomatopsis Stache in Sandberger, 1871, Stomatopsella Stache, 1889, and Megastomopsis Stache, 1889) which was considered a subfamily of Melanopsidae by Bouchet & Rocroi (2005) but probably does not belong there; species introduced in the genus Coptostylus Sandberger, 1872, which has occasionally been classified within the Melanopsidae, but is currently assigned to the Thiaridae (Pacaud and Le Renard 1995: 156).

Basic sources used for the present assembly were the catalogues of Brot (1874–1879), Bourguignat (1884), Pallary (1926a, b) and Wenz (1929), as well as internet resources such as the Biodiversity Heritage Library (http://biodiversitylibrary.org/), the Global Names Index (http://gni.globalnames.org/) and the Worldwide Mollusc Species Data Base (http://www.bagniliggia.it/WMSD/WMSDhome.htm). However, many names listed in those online repositories are obvious misspellings deriving from automatic digitization procedures that have not been critically reviewed (compare discussion in Haszprunar 2014). Such errors are not included here because they do not come from the published literature. Some of the names currently listed in those databases could neither be traced back to any publication, nor could they be linked to an evident misspelling. These names are on purpose excluded from the present paper to avoid introducing potential misspellings or nomina nuda into the literature. Nevertheless, I will be grateful to receive information on names presently not included here, as well as corrections, explanations and additions.

Some of the publications consulted for this work display problematic cases, regarding their actual publication dates or the nomenclatural or taxonomic concepts applied therein. These issues require careful examinations, which are provided below.

Melanopsis species introduced by André Etienne Justin Pascal Joseph Francois d’Audebard de Férussac

Férussac described several new species of Melanopsis in his “Histoire naturelle générale et particulière des mollusques terrestres et fluviatiles”, as well as in the “Monographie des espèces vivantes et fossiles du genre mélanopside”. The problem is to determine the exact publication dates of those works and, therefore, when and in which work which species was described.

The “Histoire naturelle” is an extremely comprehensive work, containing two volumes of text and 210 plates, which were published between March 1819 and August 1851 in 35 “livraisons”. It has been subject of intensive debates regarding the exact publication dates – for details see Kennard (1942a–c). The work was commenced by Férussac, who issued the first 28 livraisons between 1819 and 1832. After his death in 1836, Gérard Paul Deshayes finished the work by adding another seven livraisons between 1839 and 1851, including new explanations for the plates. The work includes two plates of “Mélanopsides fossiles”. The first plate was published in livraison 15 on 13 April 1822, but its captions came along with livraison 17, which was published on 2 November 1822 (Kennard 1842b: 106). The second plate appeared in livraison 21 on 27 September 1823 including its captions (Kennard 1842a: 16).

To increase confusion, there is a disagreement between the original captions provided by Férussac and the ones supplied by Deshayes with livraison 29 in 1839 (Table 1; see also Kennard 1842b: 106). Deshayes made several corrections and synonymizations and even introduced two new names in the altered captions for plate 2, i.e., Melanopsis subcarinata and Melanopsis nodosa var. longa. While the original captions for plate 2 are available to me, I could not find the captions for plate 1. Both plates were also published par for par in Férussac’s (1823) monograph on the Melanopsidae. The captions for plate 2 are the same in both works (except minor differences regarding the details provided), so we can assume the same for plate 1. However, the exact wording of the original captions of 1822 needs to be seen in the future, in order to finally ascertain the availability of the associated names. A different problem appears for plate 2. While the year of publication of the species illustrated there is undoubtedly 1823, the original publication itself is uncertain – either the livraison 21 of the “Histoire naturelle” [27 September 1823] or the “Monographie” [exact date unknown]. This matter could unfortunately not be solved.

Table 1.

Download as

CSV

XLSX

Férussac’s original figure legends of the two plates of “Mélanopsides fossiles” (1822/1823) in the “Histoire naturelle”, compared with the altered legends supplied by Deshayes in 1839 when finalizing the work. Note that Férussac’s original figure legends for plate 1 are unavailable to me and thus based on the legends for plate 7 in Férussac (1823), which are supposed to be identical (see text for details).

Plate	Férussac’s original legend (1822/1823)	Deshayes’ altered legend (1839)
1	Fig. 1, 2. Melanopsis Buccinoidea, var γ) antiqua: inflata. Des environs d’Epernay. Melanopsis fusiformis, Sowerby, Min. conch., tab. 232, fig. 1, 5, 7	Fig. 1–7. Melanopsis fusiformis, Sowerby. Diverses variétés d’Épernay, de Cuiseaux et d’Angleterre
	Fig. 3. La même plus jeune, du lieu dit les Rozières, près d’Épemay
	Fig. 4. Melanops.Buccinoidea? var. ε) Minuta; fossilis. De Cuiseaux, près St.-Amour, dans le bassin de la Saône. Nota. Les tours de spire sont un peu trop détachés dans la figure
	Fig. 5. Melanops.Buccinoidea, var. γ) antiqua: elongata. Des environs d’Epernay. Melanops. fusiformis, Sowerby, loc. cit., fig. 2, 3, 6
	Fig. 6. La même, de l’île de Wight. Sowerby, id.
	Fig. 7. La même plus âgée, des environs d’Epernay
	Fig. 8. Melanops.Buccinoidea, var. α). Fossilis. de Sestos	8–11. — buccinoides, Férussac. Des îles de la Grèce et d’Italie
	Fig. 9. Melanops.Buccinoidea, var. γ) antiqua: inflata. Du dépôt situé entre St.-Germinini et Carsoli; Italie
	Fig. 10. Melanops.Buccinoidea, var. α). fossilis. De l’île de Rhodes
	Fig. 11. Melanops.Buccinoidea, var. δ). fossilis. Des dépôts situés entre St.-Germini et Carsoli, et entre Otricoli et le Vigne
	Fig. 12. Melanops. incerta? var. de Sestos	12. — incerta, Fér. De Sestos
	Fig. 13. Melanops. nodosa. Du dépôt situé entre Otricoli et le Vigne, route de Rome à Foligno	13. — nodosa, Férussac. Otricoli
	Fig. 14. Melanops. costata, de Sestos	14–15. — costata, Fér. De Sestos
	Fig. 15. La même plus petite, de Sestos
	Fig. 16. Melanops.Dufourii, var. ε). Fossilis, maxima. Des environs de Dax	16. — Dufourii, Fér. Dax
2	Fig. 1. Melanopsis buccinoidea, var. a) Bulimus antidiluviamus, Poiret.	Fig. 1, 2, 4, 5. Melanopsis buccinoidea, Férussac. Variétés de Carsoli, Italie
	Fig. 2. Id. var. γ) Antiquua. Du dépôt situé entre Saint-Germini et Carsoli
	Fig. 3. Id. même var. Plus âgée. Du même lieu	3. — subcarinata, Desh. d’Italie
	Fig. 4. Id
	Fig. 5. Melanops.Dufourii, var. a. De Dax
	Fig. 6. Melanops. incerta, var. a). Jeune de Sestos	6. — Audebardi, Desh. De Sestos. (Confondue par Férus. avec l’incerta)
	Fig. 7. Melanops. atra, fossile? De l’île de Luçon	7. — atra, Fèrus. De Luçon
	Fig. 8. Melanops. nodosa, var. a) cylindracea. Dans une roche calcaire d’Athènes	8. — nodosa, Fèrus. Var. longa d’Athènes
	Fig. 9. Melanops. Bouei. De la Moravie	9–10. — Bouei, Fèrussac. De la Moravie
	Fig. 10. Id. var.
	Fig. 11, 13. Melanops. Martiniana. Grand exemplaires	11–13. — martiniana, Féruss. De la Moravie
	Fig. 12. La même coquille; individus moins âgés

Validity of names mentioned in Férussac’s and Deshayes’ works

Apart from the uncertainties detailed above, the inconsistent formatting of Férussac’s (1823) monograph led later authors to adopt names as valid that were certainly not intended as such by Férussac himself. He introduced several new Melanopsis species and varieties, latter of which he denoted by Greek letters followed by Latin descriptions. Quite often, he used the same Latin words to characterize different varieties and apparently did not mean to introduce available names (e.g., Férussac 1823: 154). New names (or new combinations) were always denoted by him with “nobis”. Table 2 summarizes the available species-group names and unnamed varieties introduced and described by Férussac (1823).

Table 2.

Download as

CSV

XLSX

Available species-group names (in italics) and unnamed varieties in Férussac (1823). Only the names in bold were first introduced in that work. The assigned status as Recent (R) or fossil (F) is based on Férussac’s concept of the taxon in question, whether or not this reflects the latest opinion. Abbreviations: Lam. – Lamarck; O. – Olivier.

Species	Variety	Infrasub-specific name	Remarks	Fossil/recent
buccinoidea O.				R+F
	α			R+F
	β			R
	γ (“Antiquua”)		If considered available, it was a junior objective synonym of M. fusiformis Sowerby, 1822	F
		inflata	Already available from Férussac’s “Histoire naturelle”	F
		elongata	Already available from Férussac’s “Histoire naturelle”	F
	δ			F
	ε			F
dufourii			Already available from Férussac’s “Histoire naturelle”	R+F
	α			F
	β			R
	γ			R
	δ			R
	ε			F
	ζ			R
	η			R
	θ			R
martiniana			Junior objective synonym of M. fossilis (Gmelin, 1791)	F
*incerta*				F
costata O.				R+F
	α (“Fasciata”)		Nomen nudum	?
*costellata*			Junior objective synonym of M. cariosa (Linnaeus, 1767)	R
	α			R
nodosa			Already available from Férussac’s “Histoire naturelle”	R+F
	α			F
*bouei*				F
*decussata*				R
*esperi*				R
*acicularis*				R+F
	α			R
	β			R
atra Lam.				R
spinosa Lam.				R

The variety M. buccinoidea var. “γ) Antiquua” [sic] (Férussac 1823: 149) poses a special case. It appeared first in the legend of plate 1 of the “Mélanopsides fossiles” in the “Histoire naturelle” but – if the format was the same as in the monograph – not in italic font as are the other names. In the monograph, it is the only term on the subspecific level Férussac gave in small caps, a format he otherwise used only for vernacular names of species. Because of this and the fact that he did not add “nobis” it is unlikely that Férussac wanted to introduce a new name; rather, he may have intended to indicate its status as a fossil (Latin antiqua = old). If it had been introduced as a distinct taxon, the name would have been invalid as an objective junior synonym of Melanopsis fusiformis Sowerby, 1822, which Férussac listed in synonymy.

Férussac (1822) also introduced two additional names (inflata, elongata) in the captions of plate 1 of the “Mélanopsides fossiles”, ranked below var. γ [“Antiquua”]. In the monograph (1823) they are clearly marked with “nobis”. If “antiquua” [= fusiformis] was considered as a distinct taxon, these names would be of infrasubspecfic rank, which is not governed by the Code. Both names would have nonetheless become available as species-group names after Art. 45.6.4.1 at least from Pallary (1916: 77), who used them as valid species names. At that time, however, both of them were junior homonyms and thus invalid.

Pallary (1916: 77–78) considered several of the descriptive Latin terms as available names, i.e., “M. antiqua Férussac”, “M. affinis Férussac”, “M. magna Férussac”, “M. minuta Férussac”, “M. parva Férussac” and “M. subtuberculata Férussac”. Since Pallary (1916) clearly associated those names with illustrations in Férussac (1823), they became available thereby, but with the authority “Pallary, 1916”. This actually also includes Melanopsis antiqua, which had been an unavailable name until then.

Names introduced by Jean-Pierre Sylvestre de Grateloup in 1828 and 1838

A similar problem as for Férussac’s monograph appears in works by Grateloup (1828, 1838). He labelled varieties with Latin letters, occasionally followed by Latin terms (e.g., “olivula”) and Latin descriptions and sometimes marked with “Nob.”. In his 1828-work he attributed the Latin terms minor and major to varieties of two different species. Apparently, most of these terms were meant as keywords rather than real names. This becomes obvious also from Grateloup (1838), where he introduced the new name Melanopsis gibbosula for specimens treated as “var. b. minor” in Grateloup (1828).

In order to bring stability to the problem, I propose to use only the Latin terms marked by Grateloup with “Nob.” as available names.

The taxonomic concepts applied by Jules René Bourguignat, Paul Pallary, Jean-Marie Pérès and Ferdinand Starmühlner

The works by Bourguignat and Pallary between 1853 and 1939 extended the list of melanopsid names enormously (Figure 1). Both authors applied very detailed taxonomic concepts and introduced dozens of species and varieties for even minor morphological deviations or differences in shell color. This procedure artificially inflated present-day melanopsid diversity, and few of those names are actually used today (Glaubrecht 2011). Nonetheless, most of the names are nomenclaturally available.

Figure 1.

Numbers of melanopsid taxa described between 1758 and 2015 per year and per five years. The most important contributions, i.e., pioneer works and those with numerous new taxa described, are highlighted.

Unfortunately, Bourguignat and Pallary did not foresee that subspecies (as well as forma and variety names published before before 1961, Art. 10.2) would all become included by the Code in the species group, with the Principle of Homonymy applying throughout. Both malacologists introduced many varieties, such as minor and major, often several times for different species within the very same work. Pallary apparently considered some of the variety names he introduced as self-explanatory (e.g., Latin minor means “small”) and left them undescribed (see, e.g., Pallary 1904: 37). In order to avoid inflating the present catalogus with anyway unavailable and taxonomically hardly useful names, I chose not to include these nomina nuda.

Finally, Pérès (1938a, b, 1939, 1946) and Starmühlner (1970, 1973) applied elaborate systems to categorize morphologies and coloration patterns of recent melanopsids. Pérès introduced several “formae” and “modes” that he obviously did not use as valid names but rather as descriptive terms to fit existing species into his morphological concept (see, e.g., Pérès 1939: 135–137, Pérès 1946: 166). He even assigned “types” to his morpho-units (Pérès 1939: 137). Although hardly any of his new names have any meaning in nomenclature or taxonomy, the available names are included and discussed herein.

Starmühlner (1970, 1973) in a similar way classified New Caledonian specimens of Melanopsis frustulum according to form and size of the shell (“forma”), type and height of the spire (“modus”) and coloration (“coloratus”). None of the names used by Starmühlner are available in nomenclature because they were introduced after 1961 and are of infrasubspecific rank (Art. 10.2). They are not included in this catalogus.

Note on the information provided

The catalogue lists all names in alphabetical order in the original spelling and combination, with the necessary amendments required by the Code. The status of taxa that are invalid, unavailable or unresolved is denoted in square brackets after the taxon name; those without status declaration are available and nomenclaturally valid, irrespective of their taxonomic status. The first description, or alternatively the basis of record for unavailable names, is always indicated. Taxa solely found as fossils are marked by a dagger. Taxon authorities attributed to a person other than one of the authors in the original source are only accepted as such if there is clear evidence that the description derived from that person (Art. 50.1.1). In such cases, the notation is given in accordance with Recommendation 51E. Information on type locality, type horizon (for fossils only) and type specimens are indicated as far as available. The exact spelling or phrase (given in quotes) provided for the type locality in the original source is denoted, along with an English translation if required. If the localities have been indicated indirectly (e.g., “same as for the previous species”), the phrase is given in square brackets. Old locality names have been matched with today’s geographic names as far as possible, mostly using the GeoNames geographical database (http://www.geonames.org/v3/). Places that could not be found on the map or where the matched name is uncertain are marked by a postposed question mark in the translation.

Note that Wenz (1929) in his Fossilium Catalogus quite often misstated type localities, which he indicated in spaced letters. For taxa where no type has been fixed and several localities have been mentioned in the original publication, he apparently preferred localities mentioned first or those indicated for illustrated specimens. After Art. 76.1 of the Code, in absence of a holotype or lectotype the type locality encompasses the localities of all syntypes. Illustrated specimens do not automatically qualify as holotypes or have any priority in this respect.

Information on type horizons follows the most recent age classifications found in the literature (e.g., Neubauer et al. 2015a, Georgopoulou et al. 2015 for the Neogene and Quaternary freshwater deposits of Europe). As far as possible, the present taxonomic status of a taxon is indicated, i.e., whether it has been considered a junior synonym by later authors. Data on type specimens are provided for all names where information is available, particularly for those published after 1999, when a type fixation became mandatory (Art. 16.4). If not indicated otherwise, the information provided regards the storage of the holotype. For names published by Spiridion Brusina and Petar S. Pavlović the inventory catalogues of the Croatian Natural History Museum in Zagreb (Milan et al. 1974) and the Natural History Museum in Belgrade (Milošević 1962) formed the basis. Note, however, that Milan et al. (1974) often wrongly indicated holotypes from syntype series, apparently considering illustrated specimens preferable to the rest of the material (see also discussion in Neubauer et al. 2016b). Milošević (1962) provided inventory numbers of the specimens illustrated by Pavlović; neither of both applied a type concept.

Nomenclatural notes

The following list of species-group names comprises several recurrent nomenclatural issues. In order to save space, to avoid multiple elaborate repetitions of the same rules, and to prevent that the reader needs to consult the Code constantly, I refer in text to two nomenclatural notes which are defined as follows:

Note 1: Because of the Principle of Coordination (Art. 46), homonymy in the species-group does not depend on a taxon’s original rank in the species-group. This also encompasses variety and forma names published before 1961 (Art. 10.2). Many authors have been unaware that species names can constitute junior homonyms of subspecies, variety or forma names. Only in the case of simultaneously published names the taxon of higher rank takes precedence (Art. 24.1).

Note 2: Several names of Melanopsidae first occurred in synonymy lists of other names (see, e.g., Brot 1874–1879). According to Art. 11.6 of the Code, “a name which when first published in an available work was treated as a junior synonym of a name then used as valid is not thereby made available”. Some of the names, however, have been made indeed available following the provisions of Art. 11.6.1: “However, if such a name published as a junior synonym had been treated before 1961 as an available name and either adopted as the name of a taxon or treated as a senior homonym, it is made available thereby but dates from its first publication as a synonym [...]”.

Calvert and Neumayr 1880: 376, pl. 2, figs 20–22.

Type horizon

Late Sarmatian, Khersonian, late Miocene.

Type locality

“Renkiöi” [north of İntepe], Turkey.

Remarks

The name “acanthinula” as mentioned in Pallary (1926a: 74) is an incorrect subsequent spelling. Wenz (1929: 2650) considered the taxon as a junior synonym of Melanopsis acanthica Neumayr, 1869.

†Melanopsis (Martinia) martiniana var. accedens Handmann, 1887

Original source

Type horizon

Chattian, Oligocene.

Type locality

“In der oberen Leizach, an der Schlierach, im Sulzgraben, bei Pensberg, Rimselrain, im Höllbache, am hohen Peissenberge” [all localities are near Miesbach, southern Bavaria], Germany.

Remarks

Gümbel attributed the authority to Sandberger, but there is no evidence that the description really derived from that author.

† Melanopsis bouei var. acuminata Handmann, 1882, [invalid]

Original source

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis acuminata Gümbel, 1861. Wenz (1919a: 73) introduced Melanopsis pallaryi as replacement name (see also M. raphidia Pallary, 1920).

† Melanopsis acuminata Seninski, 1905, [invalid]

Original source

Remarks

Given as “adparensis” on p. 16, but “adrarensis” in plate captions. Since Pallary clearly denoted it from the locality Adrar, the name must be “adrarensis” (Art. 32.5.1).

“ Melanopsis agoroea ” mentioned in Bourguignat (1884: 83), [unavailable]

Locality

Not indicated.

Remarks

Nomen nudum: Bourguignat (1884) listed the name in synonymy of M. laevigata, perhaps referring to an unused manuscript name. Probably the name was intended as “agoraea”, but the ligature was mixed up during typesetting.

Melanopsis ahuiri Ahuir Galindo, 2014

Original source

Pallary 1922: 207.

Remarks

Unjustified emendation and therefore junior objective synonym of M. algerica Pallary, 1904.

†Melania (Campylostylus) allobroga Oppenheim, 1892

Original source

Oppenheim 1892: 766, pl. 30, figs 5–7.

Type horizon

Calcaire de Rognac, Maastrichtian, Cretaceous.

Type locality

“Les Pennes, Valon du Duc bei Rognac” [Les Pennes, Valon du Duc near Rognac], France.

Remarks

Originally the gender was incorrectly given as neutrum (“allobrogum”), but Melania is feminine.

†Melanopsis (Lyrcea) almerai Cossmann, 1909

Original source

Melanopsis amabilis Pallary, 1928

Original source

Pallary 1928a: 261, pl. 5, figs 19–20.

Type locality

“Mechera Kredar, sur la route de Media à Larache; Bou Hellou (secteur ouest de Taza)” [Mechera Kredar (?), at the road from Mehdya to Larache; Bou Hellou, western part of prov. Taza], Morocco.

† Melanopsis hybostoma var. amaradica Fontannes, 1887

Original source

Tristram 1865: 542.

Type locality

“Streams at Heshbon and Ammon, east of Jordan”, Jordan.

“ Melanopsis amori ” mentioned in Azpeitia Moros (1929: 40, 250), [unavailable]

Locality

“Pedroche (arroyo de), en el partido judicial de Pozoblanco (Córdoba)” [Pedroche stream, district Pozoblanco, Córdoba], Spain.

Remarks

Based on a manuscript name from Hidalgo and introduced in synonymy of M. etrusca (see Art. 11.6).

† Melanopsis amphora Oppenheim, 1890

Original source

Oppenheim 1890a: 136, pl. 5, figs 2–2b.

Type horizon

Ronca Beds, Bartonian, Eocene.

Type locality

“Lovara di Tressino, Monte Pulli, Mussolon” [Lovara, Monte Pulli (near Valdagno), Muzzolon], Italy.

Remarks

Wenz (1929: 2846) considered this taxon as a junior synonym of Melanopsis vicentina Oppenheim, 1890.

† Melanopsis ampla Pallary, 1920

Original source

Gassies 1861: 291, pl. 7, fig. 11.

Type locality

“Jengen, dans les ruisseaux” [in streams at Hienghène], New Caledonia.

Remarks

Introduced for M. dufourii sensu Grateloup, 1840, non Férussac, 1822. Wenz (1929: 2662) considered the taxon as a junior synonym of “Melanopsis major Férussac, 1823”, which is not an available name.

Melanopsis scalaris var. arbalensis Pérès, 1939

Original source

Pérès 1939: 144, pl. 4, figs 15, 19–20.

Type locality

“Stations 3, 4, 1 3, 29, 35, 143. Oued Tizguit; [...] Station 109. Aïn Aghbal près d’Azrou” [Stations 3, 4, 1 3, 29, 35, 143 at Oued Tizguit; station 109 at Ain Aghbal near Azrou], Morocco.

† Melanopsis arcuata Brusina, 1878

Original source

Brusina 1878: 348.

Type horizon

Cernikian, Pliocene.

Type locality

Remarks

Unavailable for two reasons: First, the original work lacks a verbal description of the taxon which is required for names published after 1930 (Art. 13.1.1). Second, the taxon was introduced after 1961 as “forma” which is deemed to be infrasubspecific after Art. 15.2.

† Melanopsis astathmeta Brusina, 1897

Original source

Brusina 1897: 8, pl. 6, figs 13–16.

Type horizon

Pallary 1939: 91, pl. 5, fig. 29.

Type locality

“D’Acharné, sur l’Oronte, entre Hama et Kalâat el Moudik” [from Acharne at the Orontes, between Hama and Qal’at al Maḑīq], Syria.

† ? Melanopsis attenuata Sowerby in Fitton, 1836

Original source

Fitton 1836: 228, 346, pl. 22, fig. 5.

Type horizon

Weald Clay, early Cretaceous.

Type locality

“Punfield”, United Kingdom.

Remarks

After Sandberger (1870: 57) this species belongs in the genus Goniobasis Lea, 1862 (Pleuroceridae).

Remarks

Plate 5 of Sandberger’s monograph was issued in 1870, while the description on p. 110 appeared in 1871 (Woodward 1906).

† Melanopsis avellana Fuchs, 1873, [invalid]

Original source

Fuchs 1873: 20, pl. 4, figs 16–17.

Type horizon

Middle Pannonian, late Miocene.

Type locality

“Sulzlacke bei Margarethen nächst Oedenburg [...]. Tinnye bei Ofen” [Sulzlacke near St. Margarethen (Burgenland, Austria); Tinnye (Hungary)].

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis avellana Sandberger, 1870. Pallary (1920b) introduced M. ampla as replacement name.

Melanopsis lorcana var. aynensis Azpeitia Moros, 1929

Original source

Azpeitia Moros 1929: 146, pl. 2, figs 33–35.

Type locality

“Del río Mundo, cerca de Ayna (Albacete)” [in Mundo river, near Ayna, prov. Albacete], Spain.

† Melanopsis baconica Oppenheim, 1892

Original source

Oppenheim 1892: 770, pl. 34, figs 10–10b.

Type horizon

Late Santonian–early Campanian, late Cretaceous.

Type locality

“Csingerthal” (locality only given in plate captions) [near Ajka], Hungary.

Remarks

Bandel and Riedel (1994: 19) considered this taxon as a junior synonym of Melanopsis ajkaensis Tausch, 1886.

†Melanopsis (Canthidomus) balatonensis Cossmann, 1909

Original source

Bandel 2000: 160, figs 43–44, 46–51.

Type horizon

Germain 1921: 463.

Remarks

Unjustified emendation and therefore junior objective synonym of M. belusi Bourguignat, 1884.

†Melanopsis (Calodiona) bergeroni Stefanescu, 1896

Original source

Stefanescu 1896: 131, pl. 11, figs 32–37.

Type horizon

Sienisian to Pelendavian, Pliocene.

Type locality

“À Gura-Motrului et à Bocovatz, dans la vallée de Jiu” [at Gura-Motrului and at Bucovăț, in the valley of the river Jiu], Romania.

Types

Milan et al. (1974: 87) stated that Brusina (1897) had indicated one of the specimens illustrated by him (pl. 4, fig. 15) as type. However, it is uncertain whether the specimen actually derives from the original type series. The specimen is stored in the Croatian Natural History Museum, Zagreb, coll. no. 2975-621/1.

† Melanopsis hazayi var. bifilosa Brusina, 1903, [unresolved]

Original source

Brusina 1903: 113.

Type horizon

Late Pleistocene–early Holocene.

Type locality

“Bischofsbad” [Püspökfürdő, Băile 1 Mai, Lake Pețea], Romania.

Remarks

Brusina (1903) introduced several varieties with this name, apparently considering it only a descriptive term; the homonymy issue needs to be solved by a First Reviser. Currently, all of them are considered junior synonyms of Microcolpia parreyssii sikorai (Brusina, 1903) (Neubauer et al. 2014d: 125).

† Melanopsis sikorai var. bifilosa Brusina, 1903, [unresolved]

Original source

Brusina 1903: 112.

Type horizon

Late Pleistocene–early Holocene.

Type locality

“Bischofsbad” [Püspökfürdő, Băile 1 Mai, Lake Pețea], Romania.

Remarks

† Melanopsis themaki var. bifilosa Brusina, 1903, [unresolved]

Original source

Brusina 1903: 110.

Type horizon

Late Pleistocene–early Holocene.

Type locality

“Bischofsbad” [Püspökfürdő, Băile 1 Mai, Lake Pețea], Romania.

Schütt 1988a: 137, pl. 3, figs 18–20.

Type horizon

Plio-Pleistocene.

Type locality

“Höhere Lage am westlichen Orontes-Ufer 12 km S Ǧisr aš-Šugur” [western riverside of the Orontes, 12 km south of Jisr Ash-Shughur], Syria.

Types

Senckenberg Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseum Frankfurt, coll. no. SMF 307206.

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis blanckenhorni Wenz, 1929. Heller and Sivan (2001: 131) considered the species as junior synonym of Melanopsis costata (Olivier, 1804).

† Purpuroidea blaschkei Schenk, 1969

Original source

Schenk 1969: 39, pl. 1, fig. 15.

Type horizon

Late Santonian to early Campanian, late Cretaceous.

Type locality

“Zöttbachalm bei Brandenberg, Tirol” [Zöttbachalm near Brandenberg, Tyrol], Austria.

Remarks

The species was originally attributed to the marine genus Purpuroidea Lycett, 1848 (Purpuroideidae), but considered as a junior synonym of the melanopsid Megalonoda spiniger (Sowerby in Sedgwick & Murchison, 1832) by Kollmann (1984: 58).

Melanopsis bleicheri Paladilhe, 1874

Original source

Paladilhe 1874: 403, pl. 8, figs 23–25.

Type locality

“Environs d’Oran” [surroundings of Oran], Algeria.

† Melanopsis bleunardi Porumbaru, 1881

Original source

Porumbaru 1881: 29, pl. 9, fig. 6.

Type horizon

Early Romanian, Pliocene.

Type locality

“Bucovatzu” [Bucovăț], Romania.

Remarks

Wenz (1929) erroneously gave the town of Craiova as type locality, near which Bucovăț lies.

† Hydrobia bodeica Tausch, 1886

Original source

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis boettgeri Klika, 1891. Pallary (1920b: 112) introduced M. conemenosiana var. turritella as replacement name.

†Melanopsis (Pauluccia) boettgeri Brusina, 1902, [invalid]

Original source

Brusina 1902: pl. 29, figs 5–8.

Type horizon

Transdanubian, Pannonian, late Miocene.

Type locality

“Radmanest” [Rădmănești], Romania.

Types

The syntypes are stored in the Croatian Natural History Museum, Zagreb; no number indicated (Milan et al. 1974: 99).

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis boettgeri Klika, 1891. Pallary (1920b) introduced M. delicata as replacement name.

† Melanopsis boettgeri Halaváts, 1903, [invalid]

Original source

Types

The illustrated syntypes are stored in the Croatian Natural History Museum, Zagreb, coll. no. 2538-184/1-3 (Milan et al. 1974: 100).

Remarks

The name “bogdanovi” as mentioned in Wenz (1929: 2868) is an incorrect subsequent spelling.

“ Melanopsis bondeensis Gassies” mentioned in Paetel (1888: 399) and Pallary (1926a: 76), [unavailable]

Locality

“Bondé”, New Caledonia.

Remarks

Nomen nudum, found only in species lists by Paetel (1888) and Pallary (1926a). Perhaps confused with “Bulimus bondeensis” from the same locality, which Gassies (1871: 203) listed in the plate captions right below the Melanopsis species.

† Melanopsis bonellii Manzoni, 1870

Original source

Manzoni 1870: 498, pl. 3, figs 8–9.

Type horizon

Late Miocene to Pliocene.

Type locality

“Mte. Gibio nel Modanese ed a St. Agata nel Tortonese; [...] a Sogliano” [Mt. Gibio, Sant’Agata Fossili, Sogliano al Rubicone], Italy.

Remarks

In the old literature the name appears frequently as “M. bonellii Sismonda”. The name is not available from Sismonda (1847: 55), however, who solely referred to a misidentified name (M. carinata non Sowerby) in the unpublished museum catalogue of Bonelli (1827) but did not supply a description. It appears as a nomen nudum also in d’Orbigny (1852: 28) and Doderlein (1863: 16). Hörnes (1856: 595) mentioned the name along with two other melanopsids from Italy and gave a collective description for all of them (translated from German: “all individuals are smaller as the Viennese [M. martiniana], as well as more elongate, but they have the characteristic marginal bulge and the typical keel below the suture”). Following Art. 12.1, every name [...] must be accompanied by a description or a definition of the taxon that it denotes [...], which is not the case for the mentioning of M. bonellii in Hörnes (1856) because the description given there refers to a group of taxa and not a single taxon. Manzoni (1870) made the name available by providing an illustration (Art. 12.2.7).

The name “bonelli” as mentioned in Sacco (1889: 65) and Syrides (1998: 173) is an incorrect subsequent spelling.

Melanella letourneuxi var. bosnica Servain, 1884

Original source

Servain 1884: 379.

Type locality

“Migliaska” [Miljacka river near Sarajevo], Bosnia and Herzegovina.

† Melanopsis bouei Férussac, 1823

Original source

Férussac 1819–1851: Mélanopsides fossiles, pl. 2 (1823), figs 9–10 or Férussac 1823: 159, pl. 8, figs 9–10 (precedence not established; see introduction for discussion).

Type horizon

Pannonian, late Miocene.

Type locality

“Près de Bisentz, dans la vallée de la Marsch, en Moravie; [...] près de Scharditz” [near Bzenec, in the valley of the March river, in Moravia; near Šardice], Czech Republic.

Types

Papp (1953b) designated the specimen illustrated in Férussac (1823, pl. 8, fig. 9) as lectotype (after Art. 74.5). Whereabouts of type specimen unknown.

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis brevis Sowerby, 1826. Pallary (1916: 81) introduced M. abbreviata as replacement name, which is itself a junior homonym of M. abbreviata Brusina, 1874 (see M. doncieuxi Wenz, 1919 and M. atacica Wenz, 1928).

Melanopsis graellsii var. brevis Pallary, 1924, [invalid]

Original source

Pallary 1924: 250.

Type locality

“Navajas (Castellón), Alcudia, Alberrique, Jativa (Valencia)” [Navajas, L’Alcúdia, Alberic, Xàtiva (prov. Valencia)], Spain.

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis brevis Sowerby, 1826. Not available from Rossmässler (1854), to whom Pallary referred to, because he did not use the term “brevis” to denote a species-group taxon but only cited Férussac’s (1823) description of an unnamed variety of M. dufourii.

†Melanopsis (Melanosteira) aetolica brevisesta [sic] Papp & Thenius, 1952

Original source

Papp and Thenius 1952: 4.

Type horizon

Gelasian, early Pleistocene.

Type locality

Not stated in Papp and Thenius (1952), but specified by Papp (1955) as “Angelocastron, (Agrinion)” [Angelókastro], Greece.

Types

Museum of Palaeontology and Geology of the University of Athens; no number indicated (Papp 1955).

Remarks

Although probably unintentionally, Papp and Thenius (1952) briefly described and thus validly introduced the taxon. The spelling “brevisesta” is probably a lapsus calami for “brevitesta” (Latin for “short shell”), as used in the re-description by Papp (1955: 126, pl. 20, figs 10–14). Nevertheless, “brevisesta” is the correct name following Art. 32.5.1 and “brevitesta” is an incorrect subsequent spelling.

Remarks

Heller et al. (2005: 243) tentatively considered the species as a junior synonym of Melanopsis costata (Olivier, 1804).

† Melanopsis callosa Voltz, 1852

Original source

Voltz 1852: viii, pl. 3, fig. 10.

Type horizon

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis carinata Sowerby, 1826. Neubauer et al. (2014d: 125) considered this taxon as a junior synonym of Microcolpia parreyssii sikorai (Brusina, 1903).

† Melanopsis sikorai var. carinata Kormos, 1903, [invalid]

Original source

Kormos 1903: 456, 501, pl. 13, fig. 1.

Type horizon

Late Pleistocene–early Holocene.

Type locality

“Püspökfürdő” [Băile 1 Mai, Lake Pețea], Romania.

Remarks

Obviously unaware of the fact that variety names are available in nomenclature as species-group names, Kormos (1903) stated that, if raised to species, he suggests “M. mucronifera” as name for the taxon. Both names were simultaneously published and are junior objective synonyms. Since carinata sensu Kormos is a junior homonym of Melanopsis carinata Sowerby, 1826, M. mucronifera is the valid name of the taxon.

† Melanopsis staubi var. carinata Brusina, 1903, [invalid]

Original source

Brusina 1903: 115.

Type horizon

Original source

Linnaeus 1767: 1220.

Type locality

“In Aqaeductu ad Sevillam” [in an aqueduct near Sevilla], Spain.

Remarks

Today combined as Melanopsis cariosa, the species is one of the few stable taxa in melanopsid taxonomy (e.g., Glaubrecht 1996).

† Melanoptychia carusi Brusina, 1902

Original source

Brusina 1902: pl. 30, figs 6–7.

Type horizon

Remarks

Given as “capula” on p. 580, but as “cepula” in the plate captions. Guppy (1867) acted as First Reviser and fixed the correct original spelling as “cepula” (Art. 24.2.3, 32.2.1). Guppy (1867) did not consider the species a melanopsid anymore and introduced the new genus Crepitacella (Rissoinidae) with M. cepula as type species.

† Melanopsis cerithiformis Watelet, 1851

Original source

Melanopsis cesari Pallary, 1920

Original source

Pallary 1920a: 30.

Type locality

“Beni Abbès” [prov. Béchar], Algeria.

† Melanopsis clavigera f. cesticillus Brusina, 1897

Original source

Brusina 1897: 7, pl. 5, fig. 20.

Type horizon

Remarks

Pallary (1912: 14) considered the taxon as a junior synonym of Melanopsis saharica Bourguignat, 1864.

† Melanopsis choctavensis Aldrich, 1886

Original source

Aldrich 1886: 35, pl. 3, fig. 8.

Type horizon

Early Eocene.

Type locality

“Hatchetigbee, Butler, Choctaw County, Alabama”, United States.

Types

Palmer and Brann (1966: 546) stated the the figured syntype was missing. A remaining syntype is stored in the collection of the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, coll. no. 638787.

Remarks

Classified within the marine genus Bulliopsis Conrad, 1862 (Nassariidae) by Harris (1899: 58) and Allmon (1990: 53).

† Melanopsis cikosi Brusina, 1902

Merian 1849: 31.

Type horizon

Burdigalian, early Miocene.

Type locality

“Nahe am Gipfel des Plateaus des Randens” [near the top of the plateau of Mt. Randen], Switzerland.

† Melanopsis clava Sandberger, 1872

Original source

Remarks

Probably not a Melanopsidae.

†Melanopsis (Martinia) martiniana var. coaequata Handmann, 1887

Original source

Types

Remarks

Introduced for “M. cf. visianiana” in Neumayr and Paul, 1875, non Brusina, 1874.

Melanopsis guiraoi var. communis Pallary, 1924

Original source

Pallary 1924: 251, pl. 25, fig. 20.

Type locality

“Dans les cours d’eau de la province de Murcie” [in rivers of the province Murcia], Spain.

† Melanopsis neumayri var. compacta Fontannes, 1880, [invalid]

Original source

Fontannes 1879–1882: 174.

Type horizon

Mammal zone MN 11, late Miocene.

Type locality

“Les marnes à Potamides Basteroti de Visan (Vaucluse)” [in the marls with P. basteroti in Visan, Dép. Vaucluse], France.

Remarks

Wenz (1929: 2793) considered the variety as a junior synonym M. neumayri Tournouër, 1874.

Melanopsis compacta Pallary, 1920, [invalid]

Original source

Pallary 1920a: 31.

Type locality

“Aït Taleb sur le Sefrou près d’el Menzel, avant l’oued Sebou” [Douar Ait Taleb at Sefrou near El Menzel, before the Sebou river], Morocco.

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis compacta Fontannes, 1880.

Bourguignat 1884: 142.

Type locality

“Lac de Tibériade” [Sea of Galilee], Israel.

† Melanopsis conoidea Pană, 2003

Original source

Pană 2003: 319, pl. 9, figs 6–13.

Type horizon

†Melanopsis (Martinia) vindobonensis var. contigua Handmann, 1887

Original source

Handmann 1887: 29, pl. 6, figs 11–12.

Type horizon

Pannonian, zone B–D, late Miocene.

Type locality

“Leobersdorf”, Austria.

† Melanopsis hazayi var. contracta Brusina, 1903, [invalid]

Original source

Brusina 1903: 112.

Type horizon

Melanopsis tricarinata coronata Ahuir Galindo, 2015, [invalid]

Original source

Ahuir Galindo 2015: 22, unnumbered figure.

Type locality

“In brooks and ‘gorgos’ from Anna, Valencia”, Spain.

Types

Museo Malacologico di Cupra Marittima, Italy; no number indicated.

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis coronata Brusina, 1878.

Melanopsis obediensis var. coroniformis Picard, 1934

Original source

Picard 1934: 121, pl. 7, figs 45–52.

Type locality

“Jarmukmündung” [Yarmouk river mouth], Jordan/Israel.

† Melanopsis bergeroni var. costata Botez, 1914, [invalid]

Original source

Botez 1914: 240.

Type horizon

Junior secondary homonym of Melanopsis costata (Olivier, 1804). Considered as a junior synonym of Melanopsis lyrata Neumayr, 1869 by Neubauer et al. (2011: 207).

“ Mellanella hollandri [sic] var. costala [sic] Kucik” mentioned in Brusina (1867: 85), [unavailable]

Locality

“U Savi i u potoku kod Susjeda, u Žirovcu, u Maksimiru kod Zagreba, u potoku Toplici kod Oroslavja i u Kutinji blizu Jastrebarskoga” [in the river Sava and a creek at Podsused in Zagreb, in Žirovac, in Maksimir at Zagreb, in the river Toplica at Oroslavje and in Kutinja (?) near Jastrebarsko], Croatia.

Remarks

Nomen nudum, based on an “in schedis” name from the collection of Kucik (also read as “Kutschig”). The name was probably a typesetting mistake for “costata”.

†Melanopsis (Canthidomus) costatiformis Papp, 1953

Original source

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis costellata Férussac, 1823. Pallary (1916: 83) introduced M. douvillei as replacement name.

† Pseudofagotia costifera Anistratenko, 1993

Original source

Anistratenko 1993: 74, textfig. 2.

Type horizon

Duab Beds, middle to late Kimmerian, Pliocene.

Type locality

“Окр. с. Мокви, Очамчирский р-н” [near the village Mok’vi, Ochamchirskiy rayon], Georgia.

Types

Schmalhausen Institute of Zoology of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kiev; no number indicated.

Melania holandri var. costulata Schmidt, 1847

Original source

Schmidt 1847: 25.

Type locality

“Aus einem Mühlbache bei Klinze ob Schischka” [from a mill creek at Glinica near Šiška], Slovenia.

† Melanopsis inconstans var. costulata Brusina, 1874, [invalid]

Original source

Brusina 1874: 39.

Type horizon

Bourguignat 1884: 94.

Type locality

“Dans les eaux chaudes du Djerid, au nord du chott Tiraoun, dans le sud de la Tunisie” [in the warm water of Djérid, north of chott Tiraoun], Tunisia.

Type horizon

Langhian, middle Miocene.

Type locality

“Vatelj” [Fatelj hill], Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Types

Milan et al. (1974: 89) stated that only one of the specimens illustrated by Brusina (1902: pl. 29, figs 19–20) has been preserved, which they designated as lectotype. The specimen is stored in the Croatian Natural History Museum, Zagreb, coll. no. 2900-546/1.

† Melanopsis lyrata var. cylindracea Brusina, 1874

Original source

[Prevost] 1821: 137.

Type locality

“Auprès de Baden, en Autriche, dans un bassin d’eau thermale sulfureuse” [near Baden, Austria, in a sulphurous thermal water basin], Austria.

Remarks

There is considerable uncertainty about the correct authority and spelling of this species in the literature. It was first mentioned and validly described in the year 1821 as “Melanopsis Daudebartii” in an article in the Bulletin des Sciences, par la Société philomatique de Paris. Constant Prevost was often considered to be the author of this article, but from the title and text it is obvious that the article is an “Extrait” of a talk given by Prevost earlier and summarized by an anonymous author. According to Art. 50.2 and Recommendation 51D, the correct citation should be M. daudebartii [Prevost], 1821. The names “daudebarti”, “audebarti” or “audebardi”, each occurring multiple times in the literature, are incorrect subsequent spellings. Currently, the species is classified within the genus Microcolpia (see also Neubauer et al. 2014d: 126).

† Melanopsis dautzenbergi Pallary, 1901

Original source

Remarks

Junior homonym of Melanopsis debilis Pallary, 1920.

† Melanopsis decipiens P. Fischer, 1883

Original source

Fischer 1883: 60, pl. 3, fig. 3.

†Melanopsis (Lyrcea) delessei Tournouër, 1875

Original source

Annandale and Prashad 1919: 37, pl. 3, fig. 8.

Type locality

“Kaindak (long. 60°48'E., lat. 29°48'N.), Persian Baluchistan”, Iran.

Types

Indian Museum, Calcutta, coll. no. 11535/2.

Melanopsis desertorum Bourguignat, 1884

Original source

Bourguignat 1884: 134.

Type locality

“Ruisseaux entre Tarsous et Mersina (Anatolie)” [streams between Tarsus and Mersin], Turkey.

Remarks

Heller et al. (1999: 56) considered the species as a junior synonym of Melanopsis buccinoidea (Olivier, 1801). In Heller et al. (2005: 248) in turn it is treated as a junior synonym of Melanopsis saulcyi Bourguignat, 1853.

Melanopsis deshayesiana Gassies, 1861

Original source

Gassies 1861: 292, pl. 7, fig. 12.

Type locality

“La Nouvelle-Calédonie, dans l’intérieur” [inland of New Caledonia], New Caledonia.

† Melanopsis esperi var. desori De Stefani, 1877

Original source

De Stefani 1877: 310, pl. 18, fig. 9.

Type horizon

Villafranchian, Plio-Pleistocene.

Type locality

“Spoleto”, Italy.

“ Melanella hollandri [sic] var. detrita Kucik” mentioned in Brusina (1867: 85), [unavailable]

Locality

“U Savi kod Zagreba” [from the Sava river at Zagreb], Croatia.

Remarks

Nomen nudum, based on an “in schedis” name in the collection of Kucik (also read as “Kutschig”). Brot (1874: 11) listed it in synonymy of Melania holandri [sic].

Melanopsis diabetensis Pallary, 1915

Original source

Pallary 1915: 28.

Type locality

“Dans la source du jardin du Sultan, à Diabet, près Mogador” [in the springs in the garden of the Sultan at Douar Dyabat, near Essaouira], Morocco.

Melanopsis sesteri var. diadema Bourguignat, 1884

Original source

Bourguignat 1884: 119.

Type locality

“Petit cours d’eau à Sadjour-Sou, entre Aïn-Taïb et Alep [...]; Aïn-el-Bass, dans la plaine du Bahr-el-Houlé (Syrie)” [small brook at Sadjour-Sou between Gaziantep (Turkey) and Aleppo (Syria) [...]; Aïn el Bass, in the plains of the Hula valley (Israel)].

† Melanopsis dianaeformis Andrusov, 1909

Original source

Andrusov 1909: 84, 159, pl. 4, figs 21–27.

Type horizon

Pontian (sensu stricto), late Miocene.

Type locality

“Babadjan, Sundi, Meissary und Chilaalidasch” [Babadzhan, Syundi, Meysary canyon, Mount Chila-alidasch], Azerbaijan.

† Melanopsis dichtli Handmann, 1882

Original source

Remarks

The name “dircaena” as mentioned in Heller et al. (2005: 238) is an incorrect subsequent spelling.

† Melanopsis dispar Deshayes, 1862

Original source

Deshayes 1861–1864: 473, pl. 31, figs 29–30.

Type horizon

Lutetian, Eocene.

Type locality

“Brasles”, France.

Remarks

Cossmann (1888: 279) and Wenz (1929: 2639) classified the species in the genus Faunus Montfort, 1810 (Pachychilidae).

† Melanopsis dissimilis Pallary, 1916

Original source

Types

Magyar Állami Földtani Intézet (Hungarian Geological Museum), Budapest; no number indicated.

Remarks

Neubauer et al. (2016a) attributed the species to the genus Microcolpia.

† Melanopsis matheroni var. doderleini Pantanelli, 1886

Original source

Pantanelli 1886a: 69 or 1886b: 78, pl. 3, figs 5, 8 (precedence not established).

Type horizon

Tortonian–early Messinian, late Miocene.

Type locality

“S. Valentino, S. Agata, Boggione” [San Valentino, Sant’Agata Fossili, Boggione near Siena], Italy.

Remarks

Harzhauser et al. (2015: 9) considered the taxon as a junior synonym of Melanopsis narzolina d’Archiac in Viquesnel, 1846.

Pallary 1916: 80.

Type horizon

Lutetian, Eocene.

Type locality

“Au Nord d’Albas” (Doncieux 1908: 204), France.

Remarks

Replacement name for M. nodosa Doncieux, 1908, non Férussac, 1822.

†Melanopsis (Stylospirula) doncieuxi Wenz, 1919, [invalid]

Original source

Melanopsis doumeti Letourneux & Bourguignat, 1887

Original source

Letourneux and Bourguignat 1887: 157.

Type locality

“De Gafsa; [...] de Tozer et de Nefta” [from Gafsa; in Tozeur and Nafta], Tunisia.

Melanopsis douttei Pallary, 1911

Original source

Pallary 1911: 133, [unnumbered plate], figs 21–22.

Type locality

“Fez” [Fes], Morocco.

Remarks

Given as “doutte” on p. 133, but as “douttei” in plate caption. Since Pallary explicitly named the species after E. Doutté, the name must read “douttei” (Art. 32.5.1).