Campanile metaisi Merle & Pacaud 2026, n. sp.

Campanile metaisi Merle & Pacaud, n. sp. (Figs 2; 3) urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: D5A4D99C-2D50-462B-B1F6-E5F9AE4DCD4D ? Cerithium (Campanile) subsemicostatum — Cossmann & Pissarro 1909: 53-54, pl. 5, figs 9, 10 (non d’Archiac & Haime, 1854). TYPE MATERIAL. — Holotype. Pakistan • Lower Indus Basin, Sindh Province, Jamshoro district; Lakhra Dome, Old Indus section (stn 1), uppermost Lakhra Formation; early Eocene (Ypresian); CPAG. RAN.I.93 (cast MNHN. F.A93720), H: 112 mm (apex and early whorls broken, 10 whorls), D: 46.8 mm; Fig. 3A, B. Paratype. Pakistan • 1 spm; same data as for the holotype; CPAG. RAN.I.88 (cast MNHN. F.A93714), H: 56.1 mm (shell incomplete, 9 whorls), D: 27.1 mm; Figs 2D, 3D • 1 spm; idem; CPAG. RAN.I.89 (cast MNHN. F.A93715), H: 34.4 mm (shell incomplete, 7 whorls), D: 14.8 mm; Figs 3G • 1 spm; idem; CPAG.RAN.I.90 (cast MNHN. F.A93716), H: 19.3 mm (shell incomplete, 7 whorls), D: 11.4 mm; Figs 2A, 3F • 1 spm; idem; CPAG.RAN.I.91 (cast MNHN. F.A93718), H: 23.3 mm (shell incomplete, 6 whorls), D: 12.1 mm; Figs 2B, 3E • 1 spm; idem; CPAG.RAN.I.92 (cast MNHN. F.A93719), H: 33.7 mm (shell incomplete, 9 whorls), 11.8 mm; Figs 2C, 3H • 1 spm; idem; CPAG.RAN.I.94 (cast MNHN. F.A93722), H: 78.6 mm (shell incomplete, 10 whorls), D: 33 mm; Fig. 3C. OTHER EXAMINED MATERIAL. — Pakistan • 5 spms; same data as for the holotype; MNHN. F.A93713 • 6 spms; idem; MNHN. F.A93717 • 8 spms; idem; MNHN. F.A93721. ETYMOLOGY. — Dedicated to Grégoire Métais (CNRS), main contributor to the 2011, 2012 and 2014 Franco-Pakistani fieldtrips to Sindh. TYPE HORIZON. — Diversified mollusc bed of the uppermost Lakhra Formation (top of the Old Indus section, stn 1), early Eocene (Ypresian). TYPE LOCALITY. — Pakistan, Sindh Province, Jamshoro district; Lakhra Dome, Old Indus section (stn 1). DISTRIBUTION. — Pakistan, Sindh, Lakhra Formation at Old Indus section (stn 1); Leilan and Jhirak (Cossmann & Pissarro 1909), early Eocene (Ypresian). DESCRIPTION Medium sized, elongate, conical shell of more than ten convex teleoconch whorls (based on the holotype); apical angle 30°. Antepenultimate and penultimate whorls slightly more inflated that earlier spire whorls. Last whorl nearest 39.4% total height (holotype). Whorls separated by narrowly impressed suture. Protoconch and first teleoconch whorls unknown. Spiral sculpture (composite description). Specimen MNHN.F. A93716 (H: 19.3 mm, D: 11.4 mm, seven whorls, Fig. 2A) on whorls 1 to 5, P1 to P3 present; P1 close-set to adapical suture and more prominent than P2 and P3; P1-P2 fine but well-marked; P3 close-set to abapical suture. On whorl no. 6 (see Fig. 2A), appearance of s2 and appearance of weakly nodular varical ribs on P1. On whorl no. 7, P1-P2 merging – Specimen MNHN.F.A93718 (H: 23.3 mm, D: 12.1 mm, six whorls, Fig. 2B) on whorl nos. 1-2, P1 to P3. On whorl no. 3, P1 and P2 merging. On whorls nos. 4-6 (see Fig. 2B), P1-P2 fused and nodular varical ribs devoid of traces of spiral cord becoming more prominent on whorl no. 6 – Specimen MNHN.F.A93719 (H: 33.7 mm, D: 11.8 mm, six whorls, Fig. 2C), on whorl no. 2, appearance of two tertiary cords (t1+ t2) between P1 and P2. On whorl no. 4, P1, t1, t2 fusing. On whorl no. 5, P2 fusing with P1, t1 + t2 already fused. Appearance of s2. On whorl no. 6, disappearance of cord except P3 – SpecimenMNHN.F.A93714 (H: 56.1 mm, D: 27.1 mm, nine whorls, Fig. 2D), on whorl no. 1, P1-P3. On whorl no. 2, P1 and P2 fusing. On whorl no. 3 to no. 5, P1 and P2 fused and P3 close set to the abapical suture. On whorls no. 6 to no. 9, no spiral sculpture – Holotype MNHN.F.A93714 (H: 112 mm, D: 46.8 mm, ten whorls, Fig. 3A, B) no cord even on early whorls. Axial sculpture appearing approximately after disappearance of spiral cords and consisting of 15 moderately thick varicose ribs on penultimate and last whorls, and between 12-16 ribs on preceding whorls. First ribs more varicose on adapical part of whorls. Aperture narrow 54.8% of diameter and 48.8% of length of last whorl. Anal canal indistinct. Columella weakly concave, with two folds. Siphonal canal short. COMPARISONS Cossmann & Pissarro (1909) identified similar specimens from the Lakhra Formation as? Cerithium (Campanile) subsemicostatum d’Archiac & Haime, 1854. Indeed, they are reminiscent of that species, which is also a Campanile and displays nodular varical ribs (see d’Archiac & Haime 1854: pl. 29, fig. 5). However, Campanile subsemicostatum differs in its more numerous ribs (8-9 on the ventral side, instead 6-7 in C. metaisi Merle & Pacaud, n. sp.), in its opistocyrt ribs and in its wider apical angle. Moreover, d’Archiac & Haime (1854: 300) noticed that the matrix containing Campanile subsemicostatum is associated with Nummulites garansensis (accepted as Nummulites garansiana Joly & Leymerie, 1848), a Rupelian Large Benthic Foraminifera (LBF) and for this reason, Cossmann & Pissarro (1909: B53) placed a query after their identification. Considering their morphological differences and also their distant stratigraphic age, there is no doubt that C. subsemicostatum (d’Archiac & Haime, 1854) and C. metaisi Merle & Pacaud, n. sp. belong to two distinct species. Campanile metaisi Merle & Pacaud, n. sp. is reminiscent to Campanile cornucopiae (J. Sowerby, 1818) from the middle Eocene of the Paris Basin, Normandy and Hampshire in its medium size and in its nodular varices. However, Campanile cornucopiae differs by its early whorls that are more ornamented (see Wrigley 1940, figs 1, 4 and Pacaud et al. 2014: pl. 8).