WoRMS taxon details

Haliclona henrycarteri Van Soest & Hooper, 2020

1423783  (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:1423783)

accepted
Species
Haliclona densa (Carter, 1887) (misapplication and homonym)
Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887 (genus transfer, misapplication and homonym)
marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
recent only
Van Soest, R. W. M.; Hooper, J. N. A.; Butler, P. J. (2020). Every sponge its own name: removing Porifera homonyms. <em>Zootaxa.</em> 4745(1): 1-93., available online at https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4745.1.1
page(s): 22 [details]  Available for editors  PDF available [request] 

(of Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887) Carter, H.J. (1887). Report on the Marine Sponges, chiefly from King Island, in the Mergui Archipelago, collected for the Trustees of the Indian Museum, Calcutta, by Dr. John Anderson, F.R.S., Superintendent of the Museum. <em>Journal of the Linnean Society, Zoology.</em> 21(127-128): 61-84, pls 5-7.
page(s): 69-70 [details]  OpenAccess publication 
Type locality contained in Andaman Sea Coral Coast  
type locality contained in Andaman Sea Coral Coast [from synonym] [view taxon] [details]
Nomenclature Here we cite Van Soest et al.'s (2020: 22) explanation for the proposed nomen novum.
Removal of homonymy between Haliclona...  
Nomenclature Here we cite Van Soest et al.'s (2020: 22) explanation for the proposed nomen novum.
Removal of homonymy between Haliclona densa (Von Lendenfeld, 1887) and Haliclona densa sensu (Carter, 1887).
1. Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887: 822 (type locality Port Jackson, New South Wales, Australia). Hooper & Wiedenmayer (1994: 121) declared that Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887: 822 was incertae sedis, being unrecognisable from the original description. They cite an unpublished Burton manuscript in the NHM London that notes the species was “a possible haplosclerid, possibly a Haliclona sp.” Re-examination of the holotype in the BMNH (NHM) and microscope slide in the AM Sydney would be required to verify this, assuming that it was not damaged beyond identification (as Burton (1927: 289) noted that many of the specimens described by Von Lendenfeld (1887) were beach-worn or otherwise damaged and unrecognisable). Chalinorhaphis Von Lendenfeld, 1887 was first synonymised with Haliclona by Burton (1934: 529). Subsequently it was synonymized with Petrosia (Petrosia) by Desqueyroux-Faúndez & Valentine (2002: 912), but this was based only on its type species, C. armata Von Lendenfeld, 1887, and the authors also noted that their synonymy was tentative. The other two new species of Chalinorhaphis described by Von Lendenfeld (1887), C. paucispina and C. digitata, were allocated to Callyspongia and Haliclona respectively (Hooper & Wiedenmayer 1994: 532 & 115). Irrespective of the true affinities of C. densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887, we designate it here as Haliclona densa (Von Lendenfeld, 1887) because its description conforms to the genus Haliclona.
2. Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887: 69–70 (type locality Mergui Archipelago, Andaman Sea). Carter (1887: 70) erroneously (biogeographically) attributed his specimen ‘no. 71’ from the Andaman Sea to Isodictya densa Bowerbank, 1866: 292 the latter from Celtic Seas = Haliclona (Haliclona) simulans (Johnson, 1842), cf. De Weerdt (1986: 97). Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887 thus being a Haliclona, and highly unlikely to be the same species as the Northeast Atlantic species described by Bowerbank, is then a potential homonym of Haliclona densa (Von Lendenfeld, 1887). Technically, Carter’s Isodictya (= Haliclona) densa concerns a misapplication rather than a homonym. Not being conspecific with Bowerbank’s species a new name for it is warranted, which will remove a threatening homonymy with Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887. In further support of renaming Carter’s Isodictya densa is the fact that Von Lendenfeld’s description of Chalinoraphis densa (published on 15 September 1887, see contents of Zoologische Jahrbücher vol. II, p. IV) was published after Carter’s Isodictya densa (published 21 March 1887, see contents of Journal of Linnean Society vol. 21, pp. ii–iv). If Carter’s name would be maintained as Haliclona densa, then Von Lendenfeld’s Haliclona would become a junior secondary homonym, which then would need to be renamed.
3. Summary: Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887, transferred to Haliclona following Burton’s (1934) designation of Von Lendenfeld’s Chalinohaphis as junior synonym of Haliclona, is maintained as its homonymy with Haliclona densa (sensu Carter, 1887) is removed by renaming Carter’s combination as a misapplication of Bowerbank’s Isodictya densa.
Isodictya densa Bowerbank, 1866 was synonymised with Haliclona (Haliclona) simulans (Johnson, 1842), removing the homonymy with Von Lendenfeld’s species, whereas Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887 is a different species, requiring a new name. The name Haliclona henrycarteri nom. nov.was proposed, named after Henry Joh [details]
Van Soest, R.W.M.; Boury-Esnault, N.; Hooper, J.N.A.; Rützler, K.; de Voogd, N.J.; Alvarez, B.; Hajdu, E.; Pisera, A.B.; Manconi, R.; Schönberg, C.; Klautau, M.; Kelly, M.; Vacelet, J.; Dohrmann, M.; Díaz, M.-C.; Cárdenas, P.; Carballo, J.L.; Ríos, P.; Downey, R.; Morrow, C.C. (2020). World Porifera Database. Haliclona henrycarteri Van Soest & Hooper, 2020. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1423783 on 2020-07-10
Date
action
by
2020-03-02 10:28:25Z
created

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


original description Van Soest, R. W. M.; Hooper, J. N. A.; Butler, P. J. (2020). Every sponge its own name: removing Porifera homonyms. <em>Zootaxa.</em> 4745(1): 1-93., available online at https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4745.1.1
page(s): 22 [details]  Available for editors  PDF available [request] 

original description  (of Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887) Carter, H.J. (1887). Report on the Marine Sponges, chiefly from King Island, in the Mergui Archipelago, collected for the Trustees of the Indian Museum, Calcutta, by Dr. John Anderson, F.R.S., Superintendent of the Museum. <em>Journal of the Linnean Society, Zoology.</em> 21(127-128): 61-84, pls 5-7.
page(s): 69-70 [details]  OpenAccess publication 
 
 Present  Inaccurate  Introduced: alien  Containing type locality 
 

From editor or global species database
Nomenclature Here we cite Van Soest et al.'s (2020: 22) explanation for the proposed nomen novum.
Removal of homonymy between Haliclona densa (Von Lendenfeld, 1887) and Haliclona densa sensu (Carter, 1887).
1. Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887: 822 (type locality Port Jackson, New South Wales, Australia). Hooper & Wiedenmayer (1994: 121) declared that Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887: 822 was incertae sedis, being unrecognisable from the original description. They cite an unpublished Burton manuscript in the NHM London that notes the species was “a possible haplosclerid, possibly a Haliclona sp.” Re-examination of the holotype in the BMNH (NHM) and microscope slide in the AM Sydney would be required to verify this, assuming that it was not damaged beyond identification (as Burton (1927: 289) noted that many of the specimens described by Von Lendenfeld (1887) were beach-worn or otherwise damaged and unrecognisable). Chalinorhaphis Von Lendenfeld, 1887 was first synonymised with Haliclona by Burton (1934: 529). Subsequently it was synonymized with Petrosia (Petrosia) by Desqueyroux-Faúndez & Valentine (2002: 912), but this was based only on its type species, C. armata Von Lendenfeld, 1887, and the authors also noted that their synonymy was tentative. The other two new species of Chalinorhaphis described by Von Lendenfeld (1887), C. paucispina and C. digitata, were allocated to Callyspongia and Haliclona respectively (Hooper & Wiedenmayer 1994: 532 & 115). Irrespective of the true affinities of C. densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887, we designate it here as Haliclona densa (Von Lendenfeld, 1887) because its description conforms to the genus Haliclona.
2. Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887: 69–70 (type locality Mergui Archipelago, Andaman Sea). Carter (1887: 70) erroneously (biogeographically) attributed his specimen ‘no. 71’ from the Andaman Sea to Isodictya densa Bowerbank, 1866: 292 the latter from Celtic Seas = Haliclona (Haliclona) simulans (Johnson, 1842), cf. De Weerdt (1986: 97). Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887 thus being a Haliclona, and highly unlikely to be the same species as the Northeast Atlantic species described by Bowerbank, is then a potential homonym of Haliclona densa (Von Lendenfeld, 1887). Technically, Carter’s Isodictya (= Haliclona) densa concerns a misapplication rather than a homonym. Not being conspecific with Bowerbank’s species a new name for it is warranted, which will remove a threatening homonymy with Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887. In further support of renaming Carter’s Isodictya densa is the fact that Von Lendenfeld’s description of Chalinoraphis densa (published on 15 September 1887, see contents of Zoologische Jahrbücher vol. II, p. IV) was published after Carter’s Isodictya densa (published 21 March 1887, see contents of Journal of Linnean Society vol. 21, pp. ii–iv). If Carter’s name would be maintained as Haliclona densa, then Von Lendenfeld’s Haliclona would become a junior secondary homonym, which then would need to be renamed.
3. Summary: Chalinorhaphis densa Von Lendenfeld, 1887, transferred to Haliclona following Burton’s (1934) designation of Von Lendenfeld’s Chalinohaphis as junior synonym of Haliclona, is maintained as its homonymy with Haliclona densa (sensu Carter, 1887) is removed by renaming Carter’s combination as a misapplication of Bowerbank’s Isodictya densa.
Isodictya densa Bowerbank, 1866 was synonymised with Haliclona (Haliclona) simulans (Johnson, 1842), removing the homonymy with Von Lendenfeld’s species, whereas Isodictya densa sensu Carter, 1887 is a different species, requiring a new name. The name Haliclona henrycarteri nom. nov.was proposed, named after Henry Joh [details]