WoRMS name details

Eteonopsis Esmark, 1874

325777  (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:325777)

 unaccepted (subjective synonym)
Genus

Ordering

  • Alphabetically
  • By status

Children Display

  1. Species Eteonopsis geronis [apparent misspelling of geryonicola] accepted as Ophryotrocha geryonicola (Esmark, 1874) (incorrect subsequent spelling, meeting report on Esmark presentation)
  2. Species Eteonopsis geryonicola Esmark, 1874 accepted as Ophryotrocha geryonicola (Esmark, 1874) (superseded original combination)
marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
recent only
Esmark, L. (1874). [Meeting minutes 16 May 1873. Eteonopsis geryonicola]. <em>Forhandlinger fra Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania.</em> [volume of 1873-1874]: 497-498., available online at https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/43854386 [details]   
Read, G.; Fauchald, K. (Ed.) (2024). World Polychaeta Database. Eteonopsis Esmark, 1874. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=325777 on 2024-03-29
Date
action
by
2008-03-14 12:50:56Z
created
2008-03-26 11:36:43Z
changed
2015-07-17 09:47:47Z
changed
2019-06-06 05:00:10Z
changed

Creative Commons License The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License


original description Esmark, L. (1874). [Meeting minutes 16 May 1873. Eteonopsis geryonicola]. <em>Forhandlinger fra Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania.</em> [volume of 1873-1874]: 497-498., available online at https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/43854386 [details]   

additional source Esmark, L. (1880). [Meeting minutes of 3 October, 1879. Eteonopsis geryonis]. <em>Forhandlinger fra Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania.</em> [volume of 1879]:14 [p.14 of 1879 meeting minutes section]., available online at https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40938003
page(s): 14; note: The reported Eteonopsis geryonis is a misspelling of E. geryonicola [details]   

redescription Bidenkap, Olaf. (1895). Systematisk oversigt over Norges Annulata Polychaeta. <em>Forhandlinger fra Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania.</em> 1894(10): 1-142, plates I-III. [i.e., volume for 1894, printed the 1st January 1895; see page 142]., available online at http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/43710888
page(s): 73, plate 3, fig. 1-3.; note: first true description  [details]  OpenAccess publication 

new combination reference Wesenberg-Lund, Elise. (1938). Ophryotrocha geryonicola (Bidenkap) (=Eteonopsis geryonicola Bidenkap) refound and redescribed. <em>Göteborgs Königlich vetenskaps- och vitterhetssamhälles handlingar.</em> (Series B) 6(8): 1-13.
page(s): 6; note: placed Eteonopsis as junior to Ophryotrocha [details]  Available for editors  PDF available [request] 

status source Gaston, Gary R.; Benner, David A. (1981). On Dorvilleidae and Iphitimidae (Annelida: Polychaeta) with a redescription of Eteonopsis geryonicola and a new host record. <em>Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington.</em> 94(1): 76-87., available online at https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/34607927
note: authors treat genus as valid, and as authored by Esmark (1874) [details]  Available for editors  PDF available [request] 
From editor or global species database
Editor's comment A dubiously available meeting report name, in content not written by Esmark. As the name is not in use it seems unnecessary to invalidate it further, although it might strictly be a nomen nudum until clearly named by Bidenkap (1895). Of modern authors Gaston & Benner (1981) regarded Esmark (1874) as having created an available name. Wesenberg-Lund (1938) credited the authorship to Bidenkap (1895). As the name Eteonopsis first appears in print five years after its subjective synonym, Ophryotrocha Claparède & Mecznikow, 1869, there can be no dispute which is valid by priority. Gaston & Benner (1981) state that "Wesenburg-Lund (1938) must have been unaware
that Esmark provided the original description (albeit poor)", but this is hardly possible as Bidenkap gives the species name authority to Esmark. The alternative is that Wesenberg-Lund did not regard the meeting notes credited to Esmark as establishing an available name [G Read, Jun 2019] [details]