Shell money elaboration and expantion?

I got a cowry shell the other day (or at least something similar), but couldn't find the type in the catalog. Here we only 

have this one, of the common, unmodified shells:

N#52012

But my question is: Should we devide the Indian cowry shells into, for instance:

Cypraea moneta (money cowrie)

Cypraea caurica (thick-edged cowry)

Cypraea annullus (ring cowrie)

(Examples from Møntsamlernyt)

(The one in the catalog doesn't seem to be any of these though)

(My shell doesn't seem to be any of the mentioned either)

What are the people more knowledgeable about proto-money's opinion? :D

Sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_money

Møntsamlernyt, March 1970, 1st year, 1st issue. Page 10-11

Am I misssing something or are they just “shells”?

“Am I misssing something or are they just “shells”?”

- Not to a biologist. Just like not al metallic, flat objects that people use as money are just “coins” to this community.

I am not very deep into this type of “primitive” money, but I do have a few in my collection, as well as some metallic imitation types.

They were used in different parts of the world, and I can imagine that, depending on the area where they originated, different species of shells were in use. Bu again, I am not an expert in this field.

Anton

If they are visually different and were used in different part of the world, then why not?

The one in catalogue seems to be Monetaria moneta (same family as Cypraea) and I do agree to catalogue having one entry for each species. I'm no specialist in proto-money, but I'm a biologist with interest in coins; I could help in listing and getting info of species used as money if it was the approach taken by this website

As these objects are not made by humans, I guess they are all unique in terms of weight, dimension etc.

I'm not sure we should expand list of pages per species.

On a comparable matter regarding biological composition, we have one “wood” option that we dont differentiate per species