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.; Picton, B.; Kelly, M.; Vacelet, J.; Dohrmann, M.; Díaz, M.-C.; Cárdenas, P.; Carballo, J. L.; Ríos, P.; Downey, R. (2018). World Porifera database. Esperiopsis Carter, 1882. Accessed through: Glover, A.G., Higgs, N., Horton, T. (2018) World Register of Deep-Sea species (WoRDSS) at: http://www.marinespecies.org/DeepSea/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=131906 on 2019-05-22
Glover, A.G.; Higgs, N.; Horton, T. (2019). World Register of Deep-Sea species (WoRDSS). Esperiopsis Carter, 1882. Accessed at: http://marinespecies.org/deepsea/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=131906 on 2019-05-22
basis of recordVan Soest, R.W.M.; Hajdu, E. (2002). Family Esperiopsidae Hentschel, 1923. Pp. 656-664. <i>In</i>: Hooper, J.N.A. & Van Soest, R.W.M. (eds) Systema Porifera. A guide to the classification of sponges. 1 (Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers: New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London, Moscow). [details] Available for editors
additional sourceVan Soest, R.W.M. (2001). Porifera, <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</i>. <em>Collection Patrimoines Naturels.</em> 50: 85-103. (look up in IMIS) [details]
Present Inaccurate Introduced: alien Containing type locality
From editor or global species database
Remark Esperiopsis is very close to Amphilectus, which was recentley re-erected in the Systema Porifera (Van Soest & Hajdu, 2002) inspired by a threatening replacement of Esperiopsis by the older name Amphilectus. The differences were more or less artificially established as presence (Esperiopsis) or absence (Amphilectus) of sigmas and/or other microscleres in addition to the palmate chelae, and independently the size of the megascleres (over 400 microns in length: Esperiopsis, under 400: Amphilectus).
Helmut Lehnert (in litteris) pointed out that several species so far (February 2006) retained in Esperiopsis conform to Amphilectus according to above given differences. Accordingly, we adapted genus names from his suggestions, even though such genus transfer proposals were not officially published. [details]