1914  Platyclymeniidae Wedekind: 28.
     2002  Platyclymeniidae.-Korn & Klug: 232.
      -----   Platyclymeniinae.-Korn & Klug: 232
     -----    Pleuroclymeniinae.-Korn & Klug: 238.
     2005  Platyclymeniinae.-Nikolaeva & Bogoslovskii: 61.
      ------  Nodosoclymeniinae.-Nikolaeva & Bogoslovskii: 87.

A:   Conch narrowly discoidal, increasing slowly in height.
B:   Growth lines and ribs, if present, with broad, shallow sinus on the flanks, a small ventrolateral salient and a
       narrow sinus on venter.
C:   Surface smooth or ribbed. Spines may be present.
G:   Suture line simple, with broadly rounded lateral and deep dorsal lobes, which may be supplemented by an
       inconspicuous umbilical lobe.

Nikolaeva & Bogoslovskii, 2005: Family Platyclymeniidae.  Korn (2002) accepted the family Platyclymeniidae  (not accepted by SVN) to include the subfamilies Pleuroclymeniinae and Nodosoclymeniinae. Apart from the genus Pleuroclymenia Schindewolf, 1934, he provisionally assigned the genus Trochoclymenia Schindewolf, 1926 to the subfamily Pleuroclymeniinae. Korn indicated the following characters to be diagnostic criteria in the subfamily: (1) symmetrical lateral lobe, (2) subquadrate outline of the cross section, and (3) presence of a weak ventrolateral projection. These characters in our opinion are insufficient to recognize a subfamily, while the assignment of Pleuroclymenia and the poorly studied Trochoclymenia, which has a very different suture, does not seem very convincing. Korn (2002) provisionally assigned the genera Nodosoclymenia Czarnocki, 1989, Stenoclymenia, Lange, 1929, and Czarnoclymenia Korn, 1999 to the subfamily Nodosoclymeniinae. This appears to be a correct move, although the poorly known genus Stenoclymenia, which has no features allowing its assignment together with Nodosoclymenia ? Czarnoclymenia in a same taxon, has to be excluded.