Welcome to Seashell-Collector.com

Optimized for 1024*768

Last Update : 06/19/2008 21:31

General
Home Page
Online Articles (html)
Offine Articles (pdf)

Identification Help (forum)
Online Chat Room
Online Forum
Shell Dealers

Live-Seashells
Live Seashell Database
SeaShells Galleries
Mediterranean SeaShells

Links & Contacts
Shells Dealers on web
Worldwide Collectors
Shells Related Links
Contact Author
About Author

Miscellaneous
My Conidae Collection
The Cone Collector
Shells' FAQ
Beginner's Corner
Hunting Seashells
Cleaning Seashells
Storing Seashells
Taxonomy & Latin
Free Wallpapers
Identification Help
Website history

Forum
Shells identification Help
Shell General Discussion
Shell trips
Worldwide Shell Shows
Sea Shells Trading
Sea Shells Selling/buying
Land Shells Trading
Land Shells Selling/buying
Live Seashells Photo.
Pour les francophiles

FAQ PAGE 5
This Page contains following topics :
Species Versus Form ?
Space filler
Price & Rarity of shells
What causes the holes in bivalve shells?
Getting the smell out of a Seafan


Species Versus Form ?

(Original Forum Question : Is Conus bocki a form of Conus sulcatus ? The book Shells of the Philippines says it is a separate distinc species (previously thought to be a form of sulcatus) but The Manual of the Living Conidae shows it as a form of Conus sulcatus. Which is correct ?)
There is really no way to definitively answer such a question. A taxonomic placement is not an absolute that can be precisely determined, like the formula of a chemical compound. Rather, it is the considered opinion of a taxonomist, based on his/her subjective interpretation of whatever objective evidence is available. Sometimes a given placement finds favor with the majority of authors. Other times one author interprets the evidence differently from another, or places greater weight on certain kinds of evidence than another, resulting in conflicting opinions regarding the proper placement. Since this is how all taxonomic assignments are made, and since there is no objective standard against which to measure such carefully considered opinions, one cannot dogmatically state that one opinion is "wrong" and the other is "right". We can consider the apparent relative expertise of the individuals offering such competing opinions, and decide which one inspires the greater level of confidence. Or we can state which opinion is currently accepted by the majority of experts; but that still is not an absolute indicator of "correct" vs. "incorrect".
(Answer by M. Paul Monfils via the Forum)

Space filler

(I have been checking some shells list of certain dealers and in some ocassions I have seen a shell described: "Space filler"; does anybody knows actually what it means?, it is a kind of restoration?. well, that is the question: I will appreciate any answer...)

It means that the shell, though it is not the quality you might want, can "fill the space" of that missing species in your collection until a better specimen comes along.
(Answer by M. Paul Monfils via the Forum)

Price & Rarity of shells

(THIS MESSAGE IS ALL ABOUT THE STATISTICS OF CYPRAEA GUTTATA AND AURANTIUM REGARDING THIER ABUNDANCE. FRANKLY SPEAKING, CYPRAEA AURANTIUM'S STATUS DURING THIS TIME WOULD BE RELATIVELY COMMON, WHILE CYPRAEA GUTTATA'S STATUS IS UNCOMMON. BUT WHY DOES NEARLY ALL DEALERS PRICE THIER AURANTIUM AND GUTTATA HIGH ABOVE THE PRICE LIST? THAT IS BECAUSE OF THE SHELLS HISTORY AS A GREAT RARITY BACK THEN. YES IT'S TRUE THAT GUTTATA IS A DEEP - WATER SPECIE, BUT AURANTIUM IS A SHALLOW WATER SPECIE, AND MUCH COMMON TOO. SO, WHY DOES THE SHELL HAVE NEARLY THESAME PRICE? SUPPOSEDLY, THE APPROVABLE PRICE OF A 100mm AND GEM AURANTIUM SHOULD BE $50-60.00, AND FOR A GUTTATA, A 50mm GEM FOR $65-70.00.. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHY DEALERS TEND TO EXAGERATE THIER PRICES FOR THIS TWO SHELLS, PROBABLY BECAUSE OF THE EXPENSE OF TRAVELING JUST GETTING THIS SPECIES. I KNOW A DEALER THAT EVEN SELLS A GEM AND 55MM GUTTATA FOR ONLY $65.00. WHAT A BARGAIN)

The price of anything depends on the interplay of both supply and demand. As you correctly stated, there is a good supply of both these species. Neither of them is a great rarity (though gem specimens of aurantium are probably as uncommon as gem specimens of guttata. C. aurantium is much more susceptible to damage and resultant growth scars than C. guttata is, due to its more hostile reef habitat). However, what keeps the price relatively high for these species - higher than for other equally uncommon species - is not so much a limited supply as the great demand for perfect specimens. These are two shells that virtually every collector craves, and the prices reflect that fact.
(Answer by M. Paul Monfils via the Forum)


What causes the holes in bivalve shells?

(What causes the holes in shells? I collected shells on a South Carolina beach last week. Some are solid (halves) and some have a single very uniform hole on one end. Thanks!)

Such holes are caused by predatory snails, usually in the family Naticidae (commonly called "moon snails"). These snails regularly feed on bivalve mollusks like clams, mussels and oysters. They use their radula, a sort of tongue covered with tiny toothlike projections, to rasp a hole in the bivalve shell, allowing them to insert their proboscis and feed on the soft parts of the bivalve.

(Answer by M. Paul Monfils via the Forum)

Getting the smell out of a Seafan

(I recently returned from a trip to Cancun, and we were given a Seafan by a man who wanted to thank us for showing him this great spot to find shells. We brought all of our lovely shells home and they are scattered throughout my house to remind me of the wonderful turquoise water and coral sand.The Seafan, on the other hand, is sitting outside in 30-40 degree temperatures due to it having a very strong odor. It has been outside for a month now and it still stinks! Does anyone have any ideas on what to do with this otherwise lovely creature?)

The ideal treatment would be to soak the specimen in formalin (formaldehyde solution) for a couple of days, followed by soaking in alcohol, followed by drying. However, in the event you don't have access to formalin, or are not familiar with its use, just soaking in alcohol should help. "Rubbing alcohol" from the pharmacy is suitable. Sometimes they have rubbing alcohol that is 90% concentration. If so, that would be better than the 70% solution more often seen. Depending on the size of the seafan, you will need some sort of large flat container wide enough to allow the specimen to lie flat, and deep enough to hold sufficient alcohol to cover the specimen. If the specimen floats, put a weight on it to keep it submerged. After 24 hours or more in the alcohol you should discard the alcohol and cover the specimen with fresh alcohol for at least another 24 hours. It can stay in either alcohol solution much longer than 24 hours without harm if necessary. 24 hours is the minimum. However, if the alcohol begins to take on the color of the seafan (if the seafan is red for example, and the alcohol starts turning pink) that indicates that some of the pigment of the seafan is dissolving out. In that case, limit it to 24 hours in each alcohol, to avoid losing any more color than necessary. Seafans often lose much of their color anyway, once dried. Since yours is currently "refrigerated" it probably hasn't lost much color yet. Some people color them after they are dried by dying or spray paint of some kind. Once the specimen has been soaked in both alcohol solutions, just take it out and let it dry. If there is any residual odor while drying, it should be gone once the spcimen is completely dried.

Some folks spray seafans with lacquer or some sort of plastic spray to seal them and strenghthen them. This however imparts an unnatural gloss to the specimen. To seal and strengthen it without creating a glossy effect, there are a couple of methods. One is a matte finish spray that can be purchased at an art supply store. It is used, for example, to spray on charcoal drawings to "fix" them so the charcoal won't smudge when the drawing is handled. The other option is a mix of white glue like Elmer's Glue-All or Sobo Glue in water, about 1 part glue to 9 parts water. Spray or brush it on, shake off the excess, and let it dry. These coatings dry invisible but still seal the specimen against moisture and strengthen it.

One last consideration - if your specimen has a large "hold fast" attached at the base (like a "root ball" on a plant), that may be the source of most of the smell. Such a structure may contain many small mollusks, crustaceans, marine worms, and other organisms which collectively can produce quite an odor when dead. If that is the case, you still may be able to squelch the odor by soaking, though in this case longer soaking would be needed and formalin might be necessary. Alternatively, much of the odor may be eliminated by simply getting rid of the holdfast.

Note: Smells can be removed from shells using bleach, but don't try this on a seafan. It will destroy it. Good luck.

(Answer by M. Paul Monfils via the Forum)

 




 


© SEASHELL-COLLECTOR.COM, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Repeatbottom
All images on this website are fully protected by copyright laws, Any unauthorized use of these images is strictly prohibited