C aulicus/magnificus/episcopus ?

[conchylinet]

Hello,
I cannot clearly sort this cone specie out (it is from Mauritius and is 65mm long).
Any help would be welcome.

<img src="http://www.conchylinet.com/Images/Misc/50953.JPG" alt="http://www.conchylinet.com/Images/Misc/50953.JPG" style="border:0" />

Ta,
Conchylinet.

[paul monfils]

I am sure you can eliminate Conus aulicus from consideration.  I have C. aulicus in many sizes, and the pattern as well as the shape of the shell is quite different from this specimen.  C. aulicus also has a sharp apex due to the small size of its embryonic shell.  That leaves C. magnificus vs. C. episcopatus (C. episcopus is actually a synonym for C. pennaceus, and this is not that species.)  And that can be a problem, considering that the first line in the discussion of these species in Manual of the Living Conidae reads ... "C. episcopatus is so similar to C. magnificus in shell characters and body colouration that they cannot always be unequivocally distinguished and are often considered conspecific".  So flip a coin :-)  Or, if you consider them conspecific you don't have to flip a coin!

[conchylinet]

Thank you Paul. As I try to avoid specie names proliferation, I shall condider episcopatus (DA MOTTA, 1982) and magnificus (Reeve 1943) as conspecific.
C magnificus will be the right name as it had been described long ago before C. episcopatus.
B. regards,
Pierre.

[zonatus]

Hello,

The RKK also indicate that Conus magnificus doesn't live in the Mascareignes. So that leaves only Conus episcopatus ... if you are considering that episcopatus and magnificus are two different species (I do).

But for sure this complex would deserves a new study.

Best regards,

Bruno

[conchylinet]

Thanks for this input Bruno. It seems we have to wait for DNA id.
Best regards, Pierre.