Conoidea - Families

Families

Families and subfamilies within the superfamily Conoidea include according to Taylor, et al. 1993
  • Clavatulidae Clay, 1853
  • Conidae Fleming, 1822
      • Coninae – cone snails
      • Clathurellinae
      • Conorbiinae
      • Mangeliinae
      • Oenopotinae
      • Raphitominae
  • Drilliidae Olsson, 1964
  • Pseudomelatomidae Morrison, 1964
  • Strictispiridae McLean, 1971
  • Terebridae Mörch, 1852 – auger shells
  • Turridae H. Adams & A. Adams, 1853 (1838) – turrids

This same classification was accepted by Bouchet & Rocroi in 2005

New classification (2009)

In 2009 John K. Tucker and Manuel J. Tenorio proposed a classification system for the cone shells and their allies (which resorb their inner walls during growth) based upon a cladistical analysis of anatomical characters including the radular tooth, the morphology (i.e. shell characters), as well as an analysis of prior molecular phylogeny studies, all of which were used to construct phylogenetic trees. In their phylogeny, Tucker and Tenorio noted the close relationship of the cone species within the various clades, corresponding to their proposed families and genera; this also corresponded to the results of prior molecular studies by Puillandre et al. and others. This 2009 proposed classification system also outlined the taxonomy for the other clades of Conoidean gastropods (that do not resorb their inner walls), also based upon morphological, anatomical, and molecular studies, and removes the turrid snails (which are a distinct large and diverse group) from the cone snails and creates a number of new families. Tucker and Tenorio’s proposed classification system for the cone shells and their allies (and the other clades of Conoidean gastropods) is set forth at Tucker & Tenorio cone snail taxonomy 2009.

New classification (2011)

The Taylor, et al. 1993 (and Bouchet & Rocroi in 2005) classification was thoroughly changed by the publication in 2011 of the article Bouchet P., Kantor Yu.I., Sysoev A. & Puillandre N. (2011) A new operational classification of the Conoidea. Journal of Molluscan Studies 77: 273–308. The authors presented a new classification of the Conoidea on the genus level, based on anatomical characters but also on the molecular phylogeny as presented by Puillandre N., et al., 2008. They recognize fifteen families: Conidae, Terebridae, and the polyphyletic family Turridae resolved into 13 monophyletic families (containing 358 currently recognized genera and subgenera). The authors follow tentatively the classification for the family Conidae as presented by Tucker & Tenorio, 2009 who divided the monogeneric family Conidae into 82 genera. However, there is no final opinion on this issue yet, as a new molecular phylogeny of the Conidae is in preparation. There are a number of genera within the Conoidea that could not be assigned to any family.

Recognized Families in the Conoidea (as of 2011):

  • Clavatulidae
  • Drilliidae
  • Pseudomelatomidae
  • Horaiclavidae
  • Strictispiridae
  • Terebridae
  • Turridae
  • Cochlespiridae
  • Borsoniidae
  • Mitromorphidae
  • Clathurellidae
  • Conidae
  • Conorbidae
  • Raphitomidae
  • Mangeliidae

In 2012 a new lineage in the Conoidea has been revealed, leading to the creation of a new family Bouchetispiridae with one genus Bouchetispira and one species Bouchetispira vitrea, found on a isolated sea mount off New Caledonia. This is probably the only survivor of a larger clade.

Read more about this topic:  Conoidea

Famous quotes containing the word families:

    Awareness has changed so that every act for children, every piece of legislation recognizes that children are part of families and that it is within families that children grow and thrive—or don’t.
    Bernice Weissbourd (20th century)

    We urgently need a debate about the best ways of supporting families in modern America, without blinders that prevent us from seeing the full extent of dependence and interdependence in American life. As long as we pretend that only poor or abnormal families need outside assistance, we will shortchange poor families, overcompensate rich ones, and fail to come up with effective policies for helping families in the middle.
    Stephanie Coontz (20th century)