Basic info Taxonomic history Classification Relationships
Morphology Ecology and taphonomy External Literature Search Age range and collections

Conasprella (Dalliconus) sauros

Gastropoda - Neogastropoda - Conidae

Conus sauros was named by Garcia (2006) [Type Locality: 43.5 miles SSE of Port Aransas, Texas, 27.3°N, 96.6°W, 140 m Range: 28.97°N to 20.78°N; 96.6°W to 89.15°W Depth: 48 to 140 m Maximum Reported Size: 30 mm Distribution: USA: Louisiana, Texas; Mexico: Gulf of Campeche]. It is extant.

It was recombined as Conasprella (Dalliconus) sauros by Hendricks (2015).

  • Conus (Chelyconus) tortuosostriatus was named by Toula (1911) [DISTRIBUTION: Miocene-Pliocene; Caribbean.]. It is not a trace fossil.

    It was recombined as Conus tortuosostriatus by Toula (1911) and Woodring (1970); it was recombined as Conus (Hemiconus) tortuosostriatus by Cossmann (1913); it was recombined as Conus (Leptoconus) tortuosostriatus by Woodring (1928); it was synonymized subjectively with Conasprella (Dalliconus) sauros by Hendricks (2015).
Synonymy list
YearName and author
1911Conus (Chelyconus) tortuosostriatus Toula p. 508 figs. pl. 31, fig. 22
1911Conus tortuosostriatus Toula p. 508 figs. pl. 31, fig. 22
1913Conus (Hemiconus) tortuosostriatus Cossmann p. 40
1922Conus (Chelyconus) tortuosostriatus Olsson p. 49
1928Conus (Leptoconus) tortuosostriatus Woodring p. 217
1970Conus tortuosostriatus Woodring p. 359
2006Conus sauros Garcia pp. 71-74 figs. figs. 1-9
2015Conasprella (Dalliconus) sauros Hendricks

Is something missing? Join the Paleobiology Database and enter the data

EubilateriaAx 1987
classGastropodaCuvier 1797
subclassProsobranchiaMilne-Edwards 1848
superorderCaenogastropodaCox 1959
orderNeogastropodaThiele 1929
superfamilyConoidea(Rafinesque 1815)
familyConidaeFleming 1822
genusConasprella(Thiele 1929)
subgenusDalliconus(Tucker and Tenorio 2009)

If no rank is listed, the taxon is considered an unranked clade in modern classifications. Ranks may be repeated or presented in the wrong order because authors working on different parts of the classification may disagree about how to rank taxa.

No diagnoses are available