WoRMS name details
Sciaenophilus Beneden, 1852
347978 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:347978)
unaccepted > junior subjective synonym (according to Ozak et al., 2017)
Genus
Sciaenophilus tenuis Beneden, 1852 accepted as Caligus tenuis (Beneden, 1852) (type by original designation)
Scienophilus Beneden, 1852 · unaccepted (misspelling)
- Species Sciaenophilus benedeni (Bassett-Smith, 1898) accepted as Sciaenophilus tenuis Beneden, 1852 accepted as Caligus tenuis (Beneden, 1852) (Synonymized by Kabata (1979))
- Species Sciaenophilus bennetti (Causey, 1953) accepted as Caligus macrurus Heller, 1865
- Species Sciaenophilus inopinus Humes, 1957 accepted as Sciaenophilus pharaonis (Nordmann, 1832) accepted as Caligus pharaonis Nordmann, 1832 (synonym according to Humes, 1965)
- Species Sciaenophilus laciniatus Krøyer, 1863 accepted as Caligodes laciniatus (Krøyer, 1863) (synonym)
- Species Sciaenophilus macrurus (Heller, 1865) accepted as Caligus macrurus Heller, 1865
- Species Sciaenophilus nibeae (Shen, 1957) accepted as Caligus nibeae Shen, 1957
- Species Sciaenophilus pharaonis (Nordmann, 1832) accepted as Caligus pharaonis Nordmann, 1832
- Species Sciaenophilus tenuis Beneden, 1852 accepted as Caligus tenuis (Beneden, 1852) (generic transfer)
marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
Beneden, P.J. Van. (1852). Note sur quelques parasites d'un poisson rare sur nos côtes (le Maigre d'Europe, Sciaena aquila, Cuvier). <em>Bulletin de l'Académie Royale de Belgique.</em> 19(3):98-109, pl. 1. [details]
Taxonomic remark Heegaard (1966) established a new family Sciaenophilidae based on his interpretation that only the first pedierous remnant...
Taxonomic remark Heegaard (1966) established a new family Sciaenophilidae based on his interpretation that only the first pedierous remnant was fused with the cephalothra, the second and.third segments remaining separate from it. However, the first three pedigerous segments are fused to the cephalothorax as in other genera of the caligids, and therefore the family proposed by Heegard cannot be condsidered valid. Dojire 1983. p. 327-332, and considers it a Caligidae [details]
Walter, T.C.; Boxshall, G. (2024). World of Copepods Database. Sciaenophilus Beneden, 1852. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=347978 on 2024-09-18
Date
action
by
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
original description
Beneden, P.J. Van. (1852). Note sur quelques parasites d'un poisson rare sur nos côtes (le Maigre d'Europe, Sciaena aquila, Cuvier). <em>Bulletin de l'Académie Royale de Belgique.</em> 19(3):98-109, pl. 1. [details]
additional source Dojiri, M. (1983). Revision of the genera of the Caligidae (Siphonostomatoida), copepods predominantly parasitic on marine fishes. Ph.D. Thesis, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 721pp. [details] Available for editors [request]
source of synonymy Özak, A.A., A. Yanar & G.A. Boxshall. (2017). The discovery of Caligus macrurus Heller, 1865 (Copepoda: Caligidae) in the Mediterranean Sea, and the recognition of Sciaenophilus van Beneden, 1852 as a junior synonym of Caligus Muller, 1785. <em>Systematic Parasitology.</em> 94(1):97-109., available online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11230-016-9682-4 [details] Available for editors [request]
additional source Dojiri, M. (1983). Revision of the genera of the Caligidae (Siphonostomatoida), copepods predominantly parasitic on marine fishes. Ph.D. Thesis, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 721pp. [details] Available for editors [request]
source of synonymy Özak, A.A., A. Yanar & G.A. Boxshall. (2017). The discovery of Caligus macrurus Heller, 1865 (Copepoda: Caligidae) in the Mediterranean Sea, and the recognition of Sciaenophilus van Beneden, 1852 as a junior synonym of Caligus Muller, 1785. <em>Systematic Parasitology.</em> 94(1):97-109., available online at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11230-016-9682-4 [details] Available for editors [request]
From editor or global species database
Taxonomic remark Heegaard (1966) established a new family Sciaenophilidae based on his interpretation that only the first pedierous remnant was fused with the cephalothra, the second and.third segments remaining separate from it. However, the first three pedigerous segments are fused to the cephalothorax as in other genera of the caligids, and therefore the family proposed by Heegard cannot be condsidered valid. Dojire 1983. p. 327-332, and considers it a Caligidae [details]