Shell a medium length for the genus ; covered by a very light, flat white intritacalx, weakly axially striate and showing growth striae. Aperture large and ovate with a very broad and shallow anal sulcus and a barely visible callus. Columellar lip smooth, adherent posteriorly on a small surface, then detached and weakly erected anteriorly. Outer lip erect and smooth. Spire high, consisting of one and one half bulbous nuclear whorls and 5 slightly convex angular, post-nuclear whorls. First and second post-nuclear whorls bearing 9 varices and 2 very weak spiral costae ; these costae disappearing gradually on second whorl. Third whorl ornamentated with 6 to 7 sharps varices. Fourth, and body whorl bearing 5 to 6 flaring, winglike varices. Intervarical areas smooth.
Siphonal canal moderate in lenght, about 1/3 of the shell, open and dorsally curved. Operculum corneous, brown, elongate with an apical nucleus. Radula typically muricine with a curved lateral tooth and a rachidian bearing 5 independent cusps. Makassar, St.209, 00°07'S, 117°54/E, 490 m Holotype : 37.5 x 25 mm

The most important points or indicators for a subfamilial or generic placement in Muricidae are : the general outline of the shell, the operculum and radular characteristics.
The shell of Nipponotrophon makassarensis shows some affinities with the ocinebrine subgenus Ocinebrellus Jousseaume, 1880 (type sp. by O.D. : Murex eurypteron Reeve, 1845) : general form, length, winged varices... Unfortunately, the open canal, the typical muricine operculum and the radula lead me to consider this genus and subfamily as not valid for the new species.
The shell shows also some affinities with the genus Pterynotus Swainson, 1833 (Type sp. by S.D. : Murex pinnatus Swainson, 1822). However, the Pterynotus species bear always 3 varices [except for some species, questionably put in that genus, a.o. P. martinetana (Rdding, 1798) but those have a typical dentate aperture and not winged varices], which leads us once more far away from the new species.
Another possible genus might be the trophonine Trophon Montfort, 1810 (Type sp. by O.D. : Trophon magellanicus Gmelin, 1791). This seemed to be the best location for our species but the operculum and the winged varices are not typical for Trophon species.
The general outline of the shell ; the rounded, somewhat bulbous protoconch and the obsolete spiral threads on the first whorl ; the 5 to 6 sharp varices ; the radula, very near these of TV. scitulus (Dall, 1891) (MYERS and D'ATTILIO, 1980 : p. 86, fig. 5) or these of N. gorgon (Daft, 1913) (RADWIN and D'ATTILIO, 1976 : p. 84, fig. 48) lead me to consider the genus Nipponotrophon Kuroda and Habe, 1971 as the most appropriate for this new species. The only negative aspects are the form of the aperture, of the varices, and the operculum, not typical of Nipponotrophon but nearly identical to some Pterynotus sp.
A newly described species : Trophonopsis shingoi Tiba, 1981 may be compared. T. shingoi is smaller : holotype 27 x 14 mm and paratype 23 x 13 mm (both adult shells). The spire is higher, the shell presents spiral sculpture on each whorl, and five to six cords on the body whorl, while N. makassarensis has only two shallow spiral on the first whorl and a smooth body whorl, even in juveniles. Moreover, the flaring wings of T shingoi are crossed with spiral cords and present a channelled shoulder spine, while those of ? N. makassarensis are smooth, without any sculpture. The aperture of T. shingoi is different, more like a real Nipponotrophon. Moreover, T. shingoi presents a small callus on the tip of the columella while these of N. makassarensis is almost invisible.
Another species, Boreotrophon smithi Dall, 1902 may also be compared. B. smithi has a different aperture ; channeled and recurverd spiny flaring wings, pointed upwards. The adult specimens are much larger : up to 50 mm. It also bears a yellowish periostracum, not observed in the new species, and has a strongly curved siphonal canal. Moreover, B. smithi is probably an Austrotrophon which is a very different group.