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

Natica littonana

Gastropoda - Naticidae

Taxonomy
Natica littonana was named by Hall (1856). It is not a trace fossil. Its type locality is Hunter Valley Quarries, 3 miles northwest of Bloomington, which is in a Meramecian carbonate limestone in the Salem Formation of Indiana.

It was corrected as Natica littonanus by Hall (1856); it was recombined as Naticopsis littonana by Meek and Worthen (1867); it was recombined as Macrocheilus littonanum by Whitfield (1882) and Whitfield (1882); it was recombined as Sphaerodoma littonana by Keyes (1889) and Girty (1915); it was recombined as Ianthinopsis littonana by Thein and Nitecki (1974); it was recombined as Strobeus littonana by Harper (1981); it was recombined as Globozyga littonanus by Jeffery et al. (1994); it was recombined as Globozyga littonana by Wagner (2017).

Synonymy list
YearName and author
1856Natica littonana Hall p. 30–31
1856Natica littonanus Hall pp. 30 - 31
1858Natica littonana Hall
1867Naticopsis littonana Meek and Worthen p. 268
1882Macrocheilus littonanum Whitfield p. 72 figs. pl. 8 f. 28
1889Sphaerodoma littonana Keyes p. 305
1915Sphaerodoma littonana Girty p. 199
1974Ianthinopsis littonana Thein and Nitecki pp. 193 - 195 figs. f. 87
1981Strobeus littonana Harper p. 181 figs. f. 1C
1994Globozyga littonanus Jeffery et al. p. 77
2017Globozyga littonana Wagner p. S6166

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

RankNameAuthor
kingdomAnimalia()
Bilateria
EubilateriaAx 1987
Protostomia
Spiralia
Schizocoela
phylumMollusca
classGastropodaCuvier 1797
RankNameAuthor
superorderHypsogastropoda(Ponder and Lindberg 1997)
infraorderLittorinimorphaGolikov and Starobogtov 1975
superfamilyNaticoidea(Forbes 1838)
familyNaticidaeGuilding 1834
subfamilyNaticinaeGuilding 1834
genusNaticaScopoli 1777
specieslittonana

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.

Diagnosis
No diagnoses are available