Journal of Tropical Oceanography ›› 2025, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (4): 145-165.doi: 10.11978/2024165

• Marine Biology • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparative study on Conasprella cones species in Chinese waters

HE Chen1,2(), WANG Jianing1,2, CHEN Zhiyun1(), TAN Yehui1,2   

  1. 1. Marine Biodiversity Collection of South China Sea, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Applied Marine Biology, South China Sea Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510301, China
    2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
  • Received:2024-08-28 Revised:2024-09-18 Online:2025-07-10 Published:2025-07-31
  • Contact: CHEN Zhiyun
  • Supported by:
    Taxonomist Project, Chinese Academy of Sciences(CAS-TAX-24-043); National Animal Collection Resource Center, China

Abstract:

To distinguish related species of conasprella cones in Chinese waters, we compared the morphological differences among Conasprella orbignyi (Audouin, 1831), Conasprella ichinoseana (Kuroda, 1956), Conasprella comatosa (Pilsbry, 1904), Conasprella hopwoodi (Tomlin, 1936), Conasprella longurionis (Kiener, 1847) and Conus australis Holten, 1802. We also identified new distribution records for Conasprella hopwoodi and Conasprella longurionis in Chinese waters. Geometric morphometric methods were employed to analyze shell shape differences among these species. Principal component analysis (PCA) of shell outlines revealed distinct differences among Conasprella orbignyi, Conasprella longurionis, Conasprella hopwoodi, and Conus australis. Canonical variate analysis (CVA) demonstrated that the shell outlines effectively discriminate Conus australis and Conasprella orbignyi, with identification accuracy rates of 100.00% and 92.86%, respectively. PCA of spiral rib morphology on the body whorl of Conasprella longurionis and Conasprella hopwoodi indicated that the former exhibits a higher spire, wider body whorl, shorter base, and greater distances between spiral ribs, while the latter shows the opposite trends. CVA results indicated that body whorl landmarks effectively distinguish the two species, with accuracy rates of 87.50% for C. longurionis and 88.89% for C. hopwoodi. PCA of spire geometry revealed no significant separation between C. longurionis and C. hopwoodi, and CVA results aligned with those based on body whorl morphology. Similarly, PCA of aperture geometry showed no significant separation, and CVA yielded lower discrimination accuracy (62.50% and 77.78%, respectively), indicating that the aperture is not a reliable diagnostic feature for these species. This study provides a new supplementary method for identifying similar and easily confused species of conids.

Key words: taxonomy, Gastropoda, Conidae, Conasprella, geometric morphometry

CLC Number: 

  • P735