Caecum leilae, Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines, 2015
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5733/afin.056.0109 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2A9621F0-009E-4A25-A093-DD322B9EC120 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7675544 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D9D62C73-F05C-47E2-A29A-6DB0B9AD6672 |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:D9D62C73-F05C-47E2-A29A-6DB0B9AD6672 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Caecum leilae |
status |
sp. nov. |
Caecum leilae View in CoL sp. n.
Figs 10A–N View Fig , 11 View Fig , 22P, Q View Fig , 23P, Q View Fig , 24E, F View Fig , 26M–P View Fig
Etymology: Named after the late Leila Zitelli, second author’s mother.
Description: Tube rather large, cylindrical, colourless and glossy, semitransparent, evenly arched, sculptured by very fine, slightly oblique rings, more evident in the abapical half, separated by narrower interspaces. Aperture simple, contracted, slightly oblique toward the ventral side. Surface grooved by gross, shallow, worm-like incisions visible at low magnifications especially in the adapical half. Septum domeshaped, opaque, smooth, very protruding. Mucro ear-like, of variable height with respect to the septum, positioned at a variable angle between the dorsal and the right side. Surface of the septum with orange-peel aspect. Sparse, irregular grooves arranged like waves coming from the mucro are often visible on the septum. Macula small, heart-shaped, hardly visible, transparent, slightly displaced to the left side. Periostracum light brown, dull, easily lost, sculptured by fine longitudinal wormlike grooves. Juveniles quite similar to the adults, having the same morphology of the aperture, sculpture and microsculpture and are distinguished by the smaller diameter, the more curved tube, the less defined rings and by the slightly less protruding septum. Larval stage unknown. Operculum thin, corneous, circular, multispiral, composed by a small central nucleus surrounded by an initially tight spiral of 7–8 whorls. External side slightly concave, internal side with a slightly convex nucleus.
Length: 2.5–3.2 mm.
Type locality: SOUTH AFRICA: Eastern Cape: Mzamba.
Holotype ( Figs 10A–C View Fig , 22P View Fig , 23P View Fig ): SOUTH AFRICA: Eastern Cape: sh, Mzamba, beach drift, leg. R. Kilburn & D. Herbert 12–30.v.1986 ( NMSA D3032 About NMSA /T3374), length 3.1 mm, min. diam. (posterior end) 0.51 mm, diam. in the middle of the tube 0.6 mm, max. diam. (apertural end) 0.62 mm.
Paratypes: SOUTH AFRICA: Eastern Cape: 7 lv and 26 sh, Mzamba, near Natal border, vii.1976 ( JPM 2119 ) ; 2 lv and 6 sh, same data as holotype ( NMSA W9674 About NMSA /T3375) ; 1 lv, Mbotyi, beach drift, leg. R. Kilburn, D. Herbert v-vi.1985 ( NMSA C8454 About NMSA /T3885); KwaZulu-Natal : 2 lv, Mapelane, S of St. Lucia, iv.1981 ( JPM 2116 ) ; 1 lv, off Richards bay , shallow dredgings, viii.1986 ( JPM) ; 2 sh, off Durban Bluff, 18–22 m, fine sand, leg. RK, RF 1983 ( NMSA E981 About NMSA /T3883) ; 1 lv and 3 sh (1 broken), Mission Rocks, N of St. Lucia, v.1989 ( JPM) ; 1 lv and 2 sh (1 broken, 1 with two attached growth stages), Mapelane, leg J. Marais iv.1981 ( NMSA B4607 About NMSA /T3882) ; 1 lv, Umtamvuna R. mouth, beach-drift, leg. J.P. Marais vi.1996 ( NMSA V3999 About NMSA /T3884) .
Comparative material examined: C. inflatum de Folin, 1869 , lectotype (MNHN-IM-2000-24915) selected by Pizzini et al. (2013: 30, fig. 12P–R); C. attenuatum de Folin, 1880 , lectotype (NHMUK 1887.2.9.2315) selected by Pizzini et al. (2013: 3, fig. 9O, P); C. cooki Pizzini & Raines, 2011 , holotype (MNHNIM-2000-23124); C. incisum sp. n.; C. inhacaense Albano & Pizzini, 2011 , holotype (MZB 15000).
Distribution: Eastern coast of South Africa from Mbotyi (south of Port Edward) to St. Lucia ( Fig. 11 View Fig ).
Remarks: Caecum leilae resembles C. inflatum de Folin, 1869 and C. attenuatum de Folin, 1880 which show a similar annulated sculpture, but the septum is different, with a larger and illdefined mucro in C. inflatum and with a triangular outline in C. attenuatum .
Caecum leilae View in CoL can also be compared with the IndoWest Pacific species C. cooki Pizzini & Raines, 2011 View in CoL with which it shares the shape of the ear-like mucro, but shows no sculpture and a different shape of the aperture as well.
Juveniles of C. leilae View in CoL can be confused with C. incisum View in CoL and C. inhacaense View in CoL . However, C. leilae View in CoL can be distinguished by the different sculpture (obsolete rings in leilae View in CoL , incised collabral grooves defining flat rings in incisum View in CoL ) and by the mucro (broader in C. incisum View in CoL and by the presence of the longitudinal microsculpture, while the latter shows a different shape of the mucro and lacks the regular annular sculpture crossed by the longitudinal microsculpture occurring throughout the tube that is typical of C. leilae View in CoL ). Moreover, the maculae in C. leilae View in CoL and C. inhacaense View in CoL are different in both shape and colour (heartshaped and transparent in the former, roundish to chevron-shaped and opaque white in the latter) ( Fig. 24E–G View Fig ).
NMSA |
KwaZulu-Natal Museum |
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 |
|
Order |
|
SuperFamily |
Truncatelloidea |
Family |
|
SubFamily |
Caecinae |
Genus |
Caecum leilae
Vannozzi, Angelo, Pizzini, Mauro & Raines, Bret 2015 |
Caecum leilae
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
C. leilae
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
C. incisum
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
C. leilae
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
leilae
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
incisum
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
C. incisum
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
C. leilae
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
C. leilae
Vannozzi & Pizzini & Raines 2015 |
C. cooki
Pizzini & Raines 2011 |
C. inhacaense
: Albano & Pizzini 2011 |
C. inhacaense
: Albano & Pizzini 2011 |