WoRMS taxon details

Phymatolithon tenue (Rosenvinge) Düwel & Wegeberg, 1996

146389  (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:146389)

accepted
Species
marine
Not documented
LSID urn:lsid:algaebase.org:taxname:108262  
LSID urn:lsid:algaebase.org:taxname:108262 [details]

Taxonomy Phymatolithon tenue has incorrectly been associated with the name Leptophytum leave, a heterotypic synonym of Phymatolithon...  
Taxonomy Phymatolithon tenue has incorrectly been associated with the name Leptophytum leave, a heterotypic synonym of Phymatolithon lenormandii. Complex nomenclatural issues are involved. Düwel & Wegeberg (1996) concluded from a study of relevant type specimens and other material that Phymatolithon tenue was a distinct species, that the designated epitype of Leptophytum laeve Adey (1966) was conspecific with the type of Phymatolithon lenormandii, and that Adey's (1966) concept of Leptophytum laeve was in full accord with Phymatolithon tenue (also see Woelkerling et al. 2002). The holotype of L. leave, a Strömfelt specimen originally described as Lithophyllum laeve (Strömfelt 1886), was considered by Düwel & Wegebrg (1996) to be demonstrably ambiguous and not critically identifiable for purposes of the precise application of a name to a taxon, necessitating designation of an epitype. The interpretation (Athanasiadis 2007: 485) that Phymatolithon tenue is a heterotypic synonym of Leptophytum laeve stems from the arguments (Adey et al. 2001) that the designated epitype and the holotype of L laeve differ taxonomically and that the designated epitype is in serious conflict with the protologue. Based on these arguments, Athanasiadis & Adey (2003) proposed the formal conservation of the name Lithophyllum laeve Strömfelt with a conserved type. The nomenclatural Committee for Algae (Compère 2004), however, concluded that the arguments mentioned above were not substantiated, and the proposal was unanimously rejected. The Committee for Algae (Prud'homme van Reine 2011) also noted that subsequent arguments (Athanasiadis & Adey 2006: 72; Athanasiadis 2007: 485) that the epitypification of Düwel & Wegeberg was "non-effective" involve incorrect, unacceptable interpretations of the International Code of Nomenclature. [details]
Guiry, M.D. & Guiry, G.M. (2020). AlgaeBase. World-wide electronic publication, National University of Ireland, Galway (taxonomic information republished from AlgaeBase with permission of M.D. Guiry). Phymatolithon tenue (Rosenvinge) Düwel & Wegeberg, 1996. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=146389 on 2020-07-12
Date
action
by
2004-12-21 15:54:05Z
created
2010-12-13 10:09:16Z
changed
2010-12-13 11:10:30Z
changed
2013-06-06 05:26:04Z
changed
2015-06-26 12:00:51Z
changed

Copyright notice: the information originating from AlgaeBase may not be downloaded or replicated by any means, without the written permission of the copyright owner (generally AlgaeBase). Fair usage of data in scientific publications is permitted.


basis of record Guiry, M.D. (2001). Macroalgae of Rhodophycota, Phaeophycota, Chlorophycota, and two genera of Xanthophycota, <B><I>in</I></B>: Costello, M.J. <i>et al.</i> (Ed.) (2001). <i>European register of marine species: a check-list of the marine species in Europe and a bibliography of guides to their identification. Collection Patrimoines Naturels,</i> 50: pp. 20-38 (look up in IMIS[details]   

additional source Guiry, M.D. & Guiry, G.M. (2019). AlgaeBase. <em>World-wide electronic publication, National University of Ireland, Galway.</em> , available online at http://www.algaebase.org [details]   
 
 Present  Inaccurate  Introduced: alien  Containing type locality 
 

From editor or global species database
LSID urn:lsid:algaebase.org:taxname:108262 [details]

Taxonomy Phymatolithon tenue has incorrectly been associated with the name Leptophytum leave, a heterotypic synonym of Phymatolithon lenormandii. Complex nomenclatural issues are involved. Düwel & Wegeberg (1996) concluded from a study of relevant type specimens and other material that Phymatolithon tenue was a distinct species, that the designated epitype of Leptophytum laeve Adey (1966) was conspecific with the type of Phymatolithon lenormandii, and that Adey's (1966) concept of Leptophytum laeve was in full accord with Phymatolithon tenue (also see Woelkerling et al. 2002). The holotype of L. leave, a Strömfelt specimen originally described as Lithophyllum laeve (Strömfelt 1886), was considered by Düwel & Wegebrg (1996) to be demonstrably ambiguous and not critically identifiable for purposes of the precise application of a name to a taxon, necessitating designation of an epitype. The interpretation (Athanasiadis 2007: 485) that Phymatolithon tenue is a heterotypic synonym of Leptophytum laeve stems from the arguments (Adey et al. 2001) that the designated epitype and the holotype of L laeve differ taxonomically and that the designated epitype is in serious conflict with the protologue. Based on these arguments, Athanasiadis & Adey (2003) proposed the formal conservation of the name Lithophyllum laeve Strömfelt with a conserved type. The nomenclatural Committee for Algae (Compère 2004), however, concluded that the arguments mentioned above were not substantiated, and the proposal was unanimously rejected. The Committee for Algae (Prud'homme van Reine 2011) also noted that subsequent arguments (Athanasiadis & Adey 2006: 72; Athanasiadis 2007: 485) that the epitypification of Düwel & Wegeberg was "non-effective" involve incorrect, unacceptable interpretations of the International Code of Nomenclature. [details]