Haedropleura sp. 2

Figs. 43–48, 73–75

Haedropleura sp. 2 Scarponi & Della Bella, 2004: 57, fig. 89.

Material examined. Plio/Pleistocene – Zanclean/Gelasian: Castell’Anselmo (Leghorn), MGGC collection, 1 sh. Pleistocene– Gelasian: Codrignano (Bologna), 44°18’01”N 11°38’53”E, 1 sh.; Stirone river (Parma) 44°50’38”N 9°58’59”E, 1 sh.

Description. Shell small (max. length ~13.0 mm; see Appendix 1), elongate-fusiform, solid, glossy, yellowish. Protoconch almost entirely smooth, multispiral (~2.7 whorls; max. diameter 0.87 mm), with small tip, remaining whorls strongly convex, relatively wide (see Appendix 1); scattered punctate markings visible on embryonic whorls. Transition to teleoconch marked by 4–6 noticeably arched, opisthocline axial ribs on last of last embryonic whorl. Teleoconch of max. ~7.5 whorls, with high conic spire, whorls almost flat-sided. Suture moderately impressed, undulated by rib-terminations. Axial sculpture consists of 9–11 round-topped, arched ribs, each narrower than their interspaces. Growth lines not present. Spiral sculpture consists of densely packed, low, flat threads.

Aperture oblong, parietal callus present. Columellar lip straight, thin. Outer lip thin, but backed by prominent rounded varix, roundly arched, extending to very short, wide siphonal canal without anterior notch. Anal sinus subsutural, shallow, broad. Last whorl moderately to very rounded, about 0.56 of shell height.

Distribution. Haedropleura sp. 2 is surely known from sedimentary successions of Italy of Pleistocene age (Gelasian to Calabrian). The specimen from Castell’Anselmo (Tuscany) is assigned a generic Zanclean–Gelasian age.

Remarks. The specimens show all the principal characters of the genus Haedropleura in both protoconch and teleoconch. Their characteristic protoconch outline and dimensions (see Appendix 1) resemble those of H. formosa n. sp., whereas the teleoconch characters (especially rib morphology, outline and last whorl) are akin to those of H. contii. However, the very small number of specimens recovered, of which only one is complete, is not sufficient to adequately assess the variability of shell characters of this morphotype. Therefore, we keep its taxonomic position open at present.