Pila angelica (Annandale, 1920), valid species.

“Bangkok” [Thailand]; Dr. Malcom Smith, leg.

Syntypes: NZSI M.11649/2 (registered 10 September 1919, 2 spms).

Syntypes: SH 72.4, 73.5 mm, SW 69.0, 69.1 mm, AH 55.0, 57.6 mm, AW 41.9, 42.6 mm, OH 49.7, 53.8 mm, OW 29.7, 30.0 mm.

Annandale (1920: 11, pl. 1, figs 9, 10) described and illustrated the two type specimens labelled as “type”. Cowie (2015: 29) determined that only the two specimens illustrated on pl. 1 were syntypes, despite the fact that Annandale (1920: 13) gave dimensions for three specimens and implied that he had seen several more (Code, Art. 72.4.6).

Figure 2. 

Syntype of Pachylabra angelica Nevill, 1885; NZSI M.11649/2.

Pomacea erronea (Nevill, 1877), valid species.

“South America”; collector unknown.

Holotype (by original designation): NZSI M.2404 (registered 8 January 1894).

Holotype: SH 28.4 mm, SW 24.9 mm, AH 19.1 mm, AW 14.8 mm, OH 16.1 mm, OW 10.5 mm.

Nevill (1877: 17) suggested the name erronea for this South American species, which Reeve had previously misidentified as aperta Philippi. Nevill considered it readily distinguishable from aperta. He stated that the “Type” of erronea was in the Indian Museum. The dimensions of the present specimen closely match those given by Nevill for the “Type” and we consider it to be the holotype.

Figure 3. 

Holotype of Ampullaria erronea Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.2404.

Pila scutata (Mousson, 1848), probable synonym, pending further taxonomic research.

“Pegu” [= Bago, Bago Region, Myanmar] (Nevill, 1877: 9); W. Theobald, Esq., leg. (see Remarks).

Holotype (original designation): NZSI M.2426 (registered 8 January 1894). Paratypes: specimens listed by Nevill (1877: 9, 1885: 5), not found in the ZSI collections, perhaps misplaced when the collections were moved from the Indian Museum to ZSI (8–10 spms); the shell figured by Hanley and Theobald (1874 in 1870–1876: pl. 114, fig. 5), location unknown.

Holotype: SH 56.6 mm, SW 49.7 mm, AH 40.6 mm, AW 33.8 mm.

Nevill (1877: 9) listed seven specimens from “Pegu” collected by Theobald, and one from “Tenasserim?” and one from “Mandalay?” each with “No history”. He also noted that the shell illustrated by Hanley and Theobald (1874 in 1870–1876: pl. 114, fig. 5) was referable to this taxon; it is therefore also to be considered a paratype. Subsequently, Nevill (1885: 5) listed the seven Pegu specimens from Theobald (with “type var.”) but three (not one) from “Tenasserim (?)” and one from “Mandalay (?)”, all four from the collection of Stoliczka. Thus it is not clear whether there were eight or ten paratypes, as either “one” or “three” from “Tenasserim?” could be in error. Nevill (1877: 10) gave measurements for the holotype and the shell height, at least, matches that of the present specimen (NZSI M.2426); shell width was given as 48 mm, while the present measurement is 45.6 mm, probably within the margin of error. We therefore consider it to be the holotype. None of the paratypes could be found in NZSI and the location of the specimen illustrated by Hanley and Theobald is unknown. The old specimen label associated with the holotype (Fig. 12C) is almost unreadable. However, a newer label (Fig. 12C) indicates Dr F. Stoliczka as the collector, although both this label and the register indicate “Pegu” as the locality, with the collector indicated in the register as unknown, i.e. with a question mark (“?”). Nevertheless, given that Nevill (1877: 9, 1885: 5) was consistent in noting Theobald as the collector of the Pegu specimens, we consider that Theobald was indeed the collector of the holotype and that the label noting Stoliczka as the collector reflects an inadvertent error, perhaps associated with Stoliczka having collected the “Tenasserim” and “Mandalay” specimens. Cowie (2015: 36) treated expansa Nevill as a synonym of either ampullacea Linnaeus, following Sowerby (1910: 56), or gracilis Lea, following Prashad (1925: 81), but refrained from making a definitive decision, pending further research. The holotype of expansa (Fig. 4) is clearly not ampullacea, based on its shell shape. In fact, it seems more likely that expansa is a junior synonym of the widespread Pila scutata (Mousson, 1848), which is known from Myanmar (Low et al. 2013: 56; Cowie 2015: 47). Nonetheless, we refrain from formally synonymising expansa Nevill with scutata Mousson, pending further, taxonomic research.

Figure 4. 

Holotype of Ampullaria conica var. expansa Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.2426.

Pila globosa (Swainson, 1822 [in 1821–1822]), junior synonym.

“near Calcutta”; Nevill, leg.

Lectotype, by designation of Prashad (1925: 74): NZSI M.2399 (registered 8 January 1894). Paralectotypes: NZSI M.25083/5 (registered 25 September 2001, 8 spms); 5 additional specimens noted by Nevill (1877: 4), location unknown.

Lectotype: SH 32.1 mm, SW 27.5 mm, AH 22.4 mm, AW 16.3 mm. Paralectotypes (8 spms): SH 26.0–30.9 mm, SW 23.3–29.9 mm, AH 18.6–22.5 mm, AW 13.3–16.4 mm, OH 17.4–20.4 mm, OW 10.1–13.3 mm.

Nevill (1877: 4) described the variety based on 14 shells collected by himself from Calcutta and by Major L.W. Wilmer from “the village of Koakally, close to Dum-Dum” [= Dumdum, Kolkata, West Bengal, India]. Nevill (1885: 2) subsequently noted that the 14 specimens comprised 10 from Calcutta collected by himself and four from Dum-Dum collected by Wilmer. One of the Calcutta specimens was catalogued in the original ZSI (then the Indian Museum) register as the “type”, NZSI M.2399. Prashad (1925: 74) noted this specimen as the “Type-specimen”, thereby unambiguously designating it as the lectotype and restricting the type locality to “near Calcutta”, as stated by Nevill (1877: 4). Its dimensions and appearance (Fig. 5) closely match the dimensions and description given by Nevill (1877: 4). The remaining 13 specimens are paralectotypes, with only eight, all from Calcutta, found in the NZSI collections (NZSI M.25083/5).

Figure 5. 

Lectotype of Ampullaria globosa var. incrassatula Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.2399.

Pila ampullacea (Linnaeus, 1758), junior synonym.

“Java”; Baron F. von Richthofen, leg.

Lectotype (here designated): NZSI M.27736/6 (registered 17 December 2014 as Ampullaria (Pachylabra) ampullacea var. “subcelebensis”). Paralectotypes – the shell illustrated by Mousson (1849: pl. 9 [as “pl. 1”; error], fig. 1), location unknown; the shell illustrated by Philippi (1852 [in 1851–1852], pl. 19, fig. 3), possibly in the Museo Nacional de Historia Natural, Santiago, Chile.

Lectotype: SH 63.1 mm, SW 57.1 mm, AH 48.8 mm, AW 34.2 mm.

The labels associated with the specimen in NZSI M.27736/6 identify the specimen as “var. subcelebensis”, a name that has never been published; one of the labels was probably written by Nevill (Fig. 13B). However, in his original description of javensis, Nevill (1885: 6) said that this was celebensis of Mousson and of Philippi (non Quoy & Gaimard) and that it had a less produced spire than true celebensis. So the name “subcelebensis” makes sense. Therefore, although Nevill (1885: 6) named his variety “javensis”, it seems logical to consider the specimen labelled “subcelebensis” as a syntype of javensis, as also discussed by Cowie (2015: 38). Cowie (2015: 38) also considered as syntypes the shells illustrated by Mousson (1849: pl. 9 [as “pl. 1”; error], fig. 1) and Philippi (1852 [in 1851–1852], pl. 19, fig. 3), which were referred to javensis by Nevill (1885: 6). As noted by Nevill (1885: 6), the dimensions of the NZSI specimen closely match the dimensions of the shell illustrated by Philippi (above), as does its overall shape. Cowie (2015: 38) was not completely certain that the specimen in MNHNCL is that of Philippi and could not locate that of Mousson. It seems reasonable, therefore, to designate NZSI M.27736/6 as the lectotype of javensis Nevill, 1885 to stabilize the association of the name with the single NZSI specimen that Nevill had to hand when he introduced the name. The specimen illustrated by Mousson (1849: pl. 9 [as “pl. 1”; error], fig. 1) and that illustrated by Philippi (1852, pl. 19, fig. 3) are then paralectotypes.

Figure 6. 

Lectotype of Ampullaria ampullacea var. javensis Nevill, 1885; NZSI M.27736/6.

Pila ampullacea (Linnaeus, 1758), junior synonym (Brandt 1974; Ng et al. 2014).

“edge of the inner or freshwater region of the Tale Sap or Inland Sea of Singgora” (Annandale 1920: 20), “Tale Sap, near Lampam, Siam” (Annandale 1920: description of pl. 1, fig. 8) [= Muang Phatthalung District, Phatthalung, Thailand]; Annandale, leg.

Lectotype (here designated): NZSI M.10511/2 (registered 10 June 1916). Paralectotypes: NZSI M.33448/9 (ex. NZSI M.10511/2, originally registered 10 June 1916, newly registered as NZSI M.33448/9 9 October 2019, 2 spms).

Lectotype: SH 74.0 mm, SW 73.8 mm, AH 63.2 mm, AW 34.8 mm, OH, OW (operculum not found). Paralectotypes (2 spms): SH 67.2, 75.6 mm, SW 64.0, 72.5 mm, AH 56.7, 63.8 mm, AW 31.2, 33.6 mm, OH 54.2 mm, OW 30.0 mm (1 spm., operculum damaged).

In the heading of the description, Annandale (1920: 20) treated lacustris as a “Race” of turbinis Lea, in his text as a “form” (Annandale 1920: 20) and in the description of pl. 1, fig. 8 and on the label (Fig. 13C) as a “var.”. Following the Code (Art. 45.6.4), it is therefore considered to have been described as a subspecies and thus lacustris is an available name. Annandale (1920: 21) designated the “Type-specimen” (= holotype) as NZSI M.11571/2. However, the shell illustrated in Fig. 7 is unquestionably the shell illustrated in Annandale’s (1920: pl. 1, fig. 8) plate, the legend of which says “Type-specimen” (specifically, the wear of the periostracum matches Annandale’s illustration exactly). This specimen has the number “10511” written inside the aperture and is in a box with two very similar shells with labels that also have this number. This is not the shell in NZSI M.11571/2, which is more conical-shaped with a more protruding spire and a more crescent-shaped aperture, much smoother and less rugose, and much thinner and less robust, and which appears to be a different species. In these regards, it does not match Annandale’s description, whereas the shells in NZSI M.10511/2 do. Thus, two specimens could be considered to have been designated as the holotype by Annandale, the one in NZSI M.11571/2 and the one illustrated in his fig. 8, which is one of the three in NZSI M.10511/2. However, saying “Type-specimen” in the legend of fig. 8 does not designate this specimen as the holotype because it could be construed as simply referring to a type specimen not the type specimen. The description was based on only three specimens, i.e. because there is a table of dimensions of three specimens and no others were mentioned. The measurements of the three shells in the original NZSI M.10511/2 lot match those given in the table within a reasonable margin of error. The shell in NZSI M.11571/2 is smaller and its body whorl is badly broken. The original Indian Museum register gives the locality of NZSI M.10511/2 as “Mouth of the Patalung River at Lampam”, which matches the location given by Annandale in the legend of his fig. 8, whereas the register entry for NZSI M.11571/2 gives a different locality, “Koh-Si-Hah”, which refers to islands a little further south in the Tale Sap. Although the Indian Museum register indicates two specimens in NZSI M.10511/2, this is corrected to three specimens in the later type register of the ZSI, which does not list NZSI M.11571/2. Cowie (2015: 39) noted the “holotype” [by original designation] as NZSI M.11571/2 and four possible paratypes as NZSI M.10511/2, for a total of five specimens, including the holotype. Detailed study now indicates that only the three (not four) specimens in NZSI M.10511/2 constitute the type series. The only explanation we can think of for Annandale having designated NZSI M.11571/2 as the holotype was that he did this mistakenly, as it is very likely that he would have illustrated the specimen he considered the holotype and it is unlikely that he would have designated a badly damaged specimen (if indeed it were damaged at the time) as the holotype; and in any case, as noted above, this latter specimen does not match the description or measurements given by Annandale. On this basis, we here designate the specimen illustrated by Annandale (1920: pl. 1, fig. 8) as the lectotype in order to fix the concept of lacustris Annandale and to preclude further confusion. It retains the catalogue number NZSI M.10511/2. The other two specimens in the original NZSI M.10511/2 lot are re-registered as NZSI M.33448/9 and are paralectotypes. The single specimen in NZSI M.11571/2 is considered to have no type status.

Figure 7. 

Lectotype of Pachylabra turbinis var. lacustris Annandale, 1920; NZSI M.10511/2.

Pila globosa (Swainson, 1822), junior synonym.

“near Dum-Dum, Calcutta” [= Dumdum, Kolkata, West Bengal, India] (Prashad 1925: 74: pl. 13, fig. 8); Major L. W. Wilmer, leg.

Lectotype, by designation of Prashad (1925: 74: pl. 13, fig. 8): NZSI M.2445 (registered 10 January 1894). Paralectotypes: NZSI M.25082/5 (registered 24 September 2001, 2 spms); 7 additional specimens noted by Nevill (1877: 4), not found in NZSI in 2014 (Cowie 2015: 52).

Lectotype: SH 35.6 mm, SW 29.9 mm, AH 25.1 mm, AW 19.6 mm. Paralectotypes: SH 27.0, 33.2 mm, SW 24.4, 27.7 mm, AH 20.3, 23.0 mm, AW 16.3, 18.9 mm.

Nevill (1877: 4; 1885: 2) listed eight specimens from “Near Dum-Dum” collected by Major L. W. Wilmer and two specimens from “Siliguri” collected by Colonel G. B. Mainwaring. Prashad (1925: 74, pl. 13, fig. 8) subsequently unambiguously selected one of the syntypes from Dumdum as the “Type-specimen”, thereby designating the lectotype and restricting the type locality, as above (Cowie 2015: 42). Only two paralectotypes were found in NZSI in 2014. Nevill (1877: 4) considered the shell to be almost intermediate between A. globosa and A. maura but Prashad (1925: 74) considered it “as closely allied to P. conica”. It does not seem appropriate to treat it as a distinct subspecies (Code, Art 45.6.4), and therefore, following Cowie (2015: 42), who followed Prashad (1923: 587), we here treat it as a junior synonym of globosa Swainson.

Figure 8. 

Lectotype of Ampullaria globosa var. minor Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.2445.

Pila nevilliana (Annandale & Prashad, 1921), valid species.

“Tranquebar, which is on the east coast of Southern India” [= Tharangambadi, Nagapattinam district, Tamil Nadu, India]; Captain Lewis, leg. (Asiatic Society of Bengal collection).

Holotype (original designation): NZSI M.11864/2 (registered 8 December 1920). Paratypes: NZSI M.25078/5 (registered 13 September 2001, 5 spms), 2 or 3 additional specimens noted by (Nevill 1877: 5, 1885: 4), location unknown.

Holotype: SH 36.1 mm, SW 34.3 mm, AH 27.9 mm, AW 19.6 mm, OH 25.6 mm, OW 16.0 mm. Paratypes: SH 28.5–37.1 mm, SW 26.3–33.5 mm, AH 22.3–28.5 mm, AW 17.3–22.6 mm, OH 20.5–25.5 mm, OW 11.9–15.0 mm

Annandale and Prashad (1921: 12) explicitly based their description on only the specimens noted by Nevill (1877: 5) as Var. B of Ampullaria nux Reeve, 1856. However, although Nevill (1877: 5) noted eight specimens and Nevill (1885: 4) noted nine, Annandale and Prashad (1921: 12) provided measurements for only three. Nonetheless, they probably saw all Nevill’s shells, as they noted that they had “extracted the radula from one of the shells examined by Nevill, which have been in Calcutta for at least 60 years, but still in several instances contain the dried animal”; the expression “several instances” suggests that they saw more than the three for which they provided measurements. The specimen figured by Annandale and Prashad (1921: fig. 2) as the “type-shell” (= holotype) is the specimen in NZSI M.11864/2; this specimen matches the illustrations in all regards, including, the erosion/corrosion of the apex, wear of the periostracum and appearance of the operculum. Its measurements are within the likely margin of error of those given by Annandale and Prashad (1920: 12, middle column). Annandale and Prashad (1920: 11) based their description only on Nevill’s shells, either eight (Nevill 1877: 5) or nine (Nevill 1885: 4). They gave only a single catalogue number (11864/2) for the “Type-specimens” (plural). This lot now contains only the holotype. An additional lot, NZSI M.25078/5, labelled as paratypes contains five shells. Cowie (2015: 43) considered these as only “possible paratypes”. However, further study indicates that they can indeed be considered part of the type series because 1) the dimensions of at least two of them approximate the additional dimensions given by Annandale and Prashad; 2) “Tranquebar” is written on the shells; and 3) “type” is written in the original register alongside the entry for this lot.

Figure 9. 

Holotype of Pachylabra nevilliana Annandale & Prashad, 1921; NZSI M.11864/2.

Pila robsoni Prashad, 1925, valid species.

“near Balapiti, Ceylon” [= Balapitiya, Kegalla district, Sri Lanka]; G. Nevill, leg. (Nevill 1877: 12).

Holotype (original designation): NZSI M.2414 (registered 8 December 1920). Paratypes: NZSI M.21546/4 (registered 5 July 1982, 3 spms).

Holotype: SH 33.9 mm, SW 30.0 mm, AH. 25.8 mm, AW 19.5 mm. Paratypes: SH 17.5–21.7 mm, SW 15.0–19.1 mm, AH 13.4–16.3 mm, AW 8.3–11.3 mm, OH 13.4–13.4 mm, OW 7.6–7.6 mm.

Nevill (1877: 12, 1885: 7) referred his four specimens to Ampullaria moesta Reeve, 1856, but Prashad (1925: 85–86) considered this a misidentification and described his new species, based on Nevill’s four specimens, providing measurements of all four and distinguishing the largest specimen as the “Type” (= holotype). The original catalogue number for the entire type series was 2414. All but the holotype have subsequently been removed from this lot and given the catalogue number NZSI M.21546/4. The photograph of Prashad (1925: pl. 14, fig. 8) is clearly the specimen in NZSI M.2414 (Fig. 10), the holotype, based most notably on the erosion/corrosion of the apex; his other photograph (Prashad 1925: pl. 14, fig. 9) is of one of the paratypes.

Figure 10. 

Holotype of Pila robsoni Prashad, 1925; NZSI M.2414.

Pila scutata (Mousson, 1848), junior synonym (Ng et al. 2014).

“Penang” [Malaysia]; Dr F. Stoliczka, leg.

Lectotype (here designated): NZSI M.2420. Paralectotypes: NZSI M.25079/5 (registered 14 September 2001, 7 spms [2 full-grown, 5 young]).

Lectotype: SH 54.0 mm, SW 42.1 mm, AH 36.1 mm, AW 28.3 mm, OH 32.1 mm, OW 18.7 mm. Paralectotypes: SH 9.0–53.1 mm, SW 8.0–42.1 mm, AH 7.5–34.1 mm, AW 5.5–23.9 mm, OH 20.4–30.2 mm, OW 10.9–19.4 mm (OH and OW data lacking for the four smallest specimen(s).

Nevill (1877: 11) indicated that the type series contained seven specimens (three full-grown and four young) but in his subsequent catalogue (Nevill 1885: 7) he noted only six. The original catalogue number for the entire type series was 2420, and in fact it contained eight specimens, a discrepancy noted by Cowie (2015: 49). All but one of these eight specimens have subsequently been removed from this lot and given the catalogue number NZSI M.25079/5, with the remaining specimen (NZSI M.2420) treated as the “holotype” (“type” on labels; Fig. 16) and the other seven as “paratypes”. However, no holotype was designated in the original publication (Code, Art. 73.1). We therefore here designate the shell in NZSI M.2420 as the lectotype (Fig. 11) to fix the concept of stoliczkana Nevill, with the seven specimens in NZSI M.25079/5 becoming paralectotypes, of which two are full-grown and five are juveniles, including one that is extremely small. Perhaps this smallest specimen was overlooked by Nevill (1877: 11) in noting three full-grown and four young specimens. The dimensions and appearance of the lectotype correspond closely with the description and dimensions given by Nevill (1877: 11–12).

Figure 11. 

Holotype of Ampullaria stoliczkana Nevill, 1885; NZSI M.2420.

Figure 12. 

Collection labels. A. Pachylabra angelica Annandale, 1920; NZSI M.11649/2. B. Ampullaria erronea Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.2404. C. Ampullaria conica var. expansa Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.2426.

Figure 13. 

Collection labels. A. Ampullaria globosa var. incrassatula Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.25083/5. B. Ampullaria ampullacea var. javensis Nevill, 1885 (referred to as the unpublished name “subcelebensis”; see text for explanation); NZSI M.27736/6. C. Pachylabra turbinis Race lacustris Annandale, 1920; NZSI M.10511/2 (lectotype).

Figure 14. 

Collection labels. Ampullaria globosa var. minor Nevill, 1877; NZSI M.2445.

Figure 15. 

Collection labels. A. Pachylabra nevilliana Annandale & Prashad, 1921; NZSI M.11864/2. B. Pila robsoni Prashad, 1925; NZSI M.2414 (holotype), NZSI M.21546/4 (paratypes).

Figure 16. 

Collection labels. Ampullaria stoliczkana Nevill, 1885; NZSI M.2420.