Cochlostoma (T.) simrothi (Caziot, 1908)

Figs 105 (magenta dot), 106

Pomatias simrothi Caziot, 1908: 460 .

Types

Not seen.

Other specimen

FRANCE • 1- Saorge (topotypical); 43.9881° N, 7.5513° E; 2009; Margelli leg.; EZ0782 .

Type locality

FRANCE • Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur, Gorge de Saorge.

Description

SHELL. Last part of protoconch ribbed with very closely spaced riblets. Teleoconch spotless, with moderately strong and rounded ribs becoming weaker approaching aperture. Strong and developed lip. Columellar lobe bent inwardly to cover umbilicus.

MEASUREMENTS. 2 ♀♀: whorls =8.1–8.2, H = 8.1–8.8 mm, H/W= 2.62–2.76, roundness =0.1–0.11, ribs incl.= 53–60°, apert. incl.= 14–15°, ribs/mm 1 st wh.= 8–8, ribs/mm 4 th wh.=8–10.

FEMALE GENITAL ORGANS (1 ♀). Ventral connection of pedunculus of bursa copulatrix. One or no loops between apex of seminal receptacle and proximal loop.Almost tubular seminal receptacle with undefined basis. Junction of uterus gland close to connection between pedunculus of bursa copulatrix and distal oviduct.

Remarks

Cochlostoma (T.) simrothi lives in the Maritime Alps, an area where different taxa have been described ( Pomatias simrothi Caziot, 1908, Pomatias acutum Caziot, 1908, Pomatias galloprovincialis Locard, 1894 and Pomatias subalpinus Pini, 1885). We lack a proper sampling of this area which needs a dedicated study.

Previous authors considered C. (T.) simrothi a subspecies of C. (T.) patulum (Zilch 1958; “possibly conspecific” in Welter-Schultes 2012: 101). The similarities of the shell suggest a relation with patulum but the female genital morphology of the specimen we analysed differs from the samples of patulum . Another entity has been described from the same area (roughly 5 km south) as Cochlostoma acutum (Caziot, 1908) . This is considered a synonym of “ simrothi ” by Boato et al. (1984) but accepted as a species on its own by Gargominy & Ripken (2006) because found syntopically with C. (T.) simrothi . We did not analyse samples of this taxon (only seen in pictures). It cannot be excluded that it is not part of Turritus and instead belongs to the subgenus Dalfreddia Zallot et al., 2015 .