keithphotos.evans's picture

10mm snail

Observed: 11th July 2012 By: keithphotos.evanskeithphotos.evans’s reputation in Invertebrateskeithphotos.evans’s reputation in Invertebrateskeithphotos.evans’s reputation in Invertebrates
10mm snail

fantastic met colours in the twisted cone

Species interactions

No interactions present.


stevegregory's picture

Martin is correct

Martin is correct since Balea (Balea) sarsii is now considered the correct name for what was previously called Balea (Balea) heydeni.

Both refer to the same species, but I was out of date with my nomeclature :(

dejayM's picture


Yes, I've come back to this as I have begun a new local monitoring programme.
Do either of you know the value of agreeing to either of both? I ask because the panel is incomplete for sarsii and heydeni is still accepted by a number of authorities. How does iSpot handle conflicting IDs - it sometimers seems blind to names but Likely is triggered or altered by the likes of lowly me (you both have the same power).
Read here -

Martin Harvey's picture


I'll make the same comment that I always make - iSpot's species names come from the species dictionaries that we link to, in this case the UKSI:

At the moment the UKSI still uses Balea heydeni, hence if you type in Balea sarsii no links appear to NBN etc. (and also next time we export iSpot observations to the mollusc recording scheme this one will get missed out if the Likely ID doesn't link to the UKSI).

So my preference is always to stick to the names in the UKSI, even if these are out of date when compared to other sources. But I know that not everyone agrees with me! I've now agreed with Steve's ID as heydeni, which has tipped the balance for the Likely ID back to that name, for now anyway!

Entomologist and biological recorder

martinjohnbishop's picture

Still awaiting news

from an author of the B. heydeni paper (Richard Preece).

However in use in the UK and Ireland

This is the publication where B.sarsii was used as a prior name for B. heydeni

More information here

Catalogue of Life does not appear to have any Balea species; not even Balea perversa!


martinjohnbishop's picture

It has taken more than two years..

But still we are waiting for UKSI to catch up.

You will find that the Natural History Museum, Conch. Soc. etc now use B. sarsii

Richard Preece
8:36 AM (9 hours ago)

to me
Hi Martin
My understanding is that heydeni von Maltzan 1881 is a junior synonym of sarsii Pfeiffer 1847 (type locality: Norway). Ted von Proschwitz discovered this earlier name.
Best wishes


At 17:29 24/09/2014, you wrote:
I would like to know if you have any recent updates on the heydeni/sarsii naming issue.

UKSI really should be using Balea sarsii

CoL does not have any Balea species! Maybe something is wrong with the current dictionary approach?
I understand that the world of taxonomy/ nomenclature is full of pitfalls, but the case does not seem so