Intro 
Species 
Specimens 
Distribution 
Checklist 
Sources 
Log in 

Porifera name details

Rhabdoploca curvispiculifera (Carter, 1880)

133157  (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:133157)

 unaccepted (genus transfer)
Species

Ordering

  • Alphabetically
  • By status

Children Display

marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
recent only
(of Microciona curvispiculifera Carter, 1880) Carter, H.J. (1880). Report on Specimens dredged up from the Gulf of Manaar and presented to the Liverpool Free Museum by Capt.W.H. Cawne Warren. <em>Annals and Magazine of Natural History.</em> (5) 6(31):35-61, pls IV-VI; 129-156, pls VII, VIII.
page(s): 43-44 [details]  OpenAccess publication 
Taxonomy Topsent (1904) records this species from deep water off the Azores, emphasizing the similarities with Carter's description....  
Taxonomy Topsent (1904) records this species from deep water off the Azores, emphasizing the similarities with Carter's description. However, he mentions clear spicule size differences between the two, and in view of the geographic distance these specimens are unlikely to be conspecific.  [details]
de Voogd, N.J.; Alvarez, B.; Boury-Esnault, N.; Cárdenas, P.; Díaz, M.-C.; Dohrmann, M.; Downey, R.; Goodwin, C.; Hajdu, E.; Hooper, J.N.A.; Kelly, M.; Klautau, M.; Lim, S.C.; Manconi, R.; Morrow, C.; Pinheiro, U.; Pisera, A.B.; Ríos, P.; Rützler, K.; Schönberg, C.; Turner, T.; Vacelet, J.; van Soest, R.W.M.; Xavier, J. (2024). World Porifera Database. Rhabdoploca curvispiculifera (Carter, 1880). Accessed at: https://www.marinespecies.org/porifera/porifera.php/porifera.php?p=taxdetails&id=133157 on 2024-04-23
Date
action
by
2004-12-21 15:54:05Z
created
2006-02-08 18:57:09Z
changed
2019-03-22 15:11:33Z
changed

original description  (of Microciona curvispiculifera Carter, 1880) Carter, H.J. (1880). Report on Specimens dredged up from the Gulf of Manaar and presented to the Liverpool Free Museum by Capt.W.H. Cawne Warren. <em>Annals and Magazine of Natural History.</em> (5) 6(31):35-61, pls IV-VI; 129-156, pls VII, VIII.
page(s): 43-44 [details]  OpenAccess publication 

additional source Van 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)
note: Misapplication [details]  OpenAccess publication 

additional source Bibiloni, M.A. (1993). Some new or poorly known sponges of the Balearic Islands (western Mediterranean) Pp. 307-318. <i>In</i>: Uriz, M.-J. & Rützler, K. (Eds), Recent Advances in Ecology and Systematics of Sponges. <em>Scientia Marina.</em> 57 (4): 273-432.
page(s): 315; fig 11; note: Misapplication [details]  Available for editors  PDF available [request] 

additional source Topsent, E. (1904). Spongiaires des Açores. <em>Résultats des campagnes scientifiques accomplies par le Prince Albert I. Monaco.</em> 25: 1-280, pls 1-18., available online at https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40603003
page(s): 158-159; note: Misapplication [details]  OpenAccess publication 

additional source Vacelet, J. (1969). Eponges de la Roche du Large et de l'étage bathyal de Méditerranée (Récoltes de la soucoupe plongeante Cousteau et dragages). Mémoires du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle. <em>Mémoires du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (A, Zoologie).</em> 59(2): 145-219, pls I-IV.
page(s): 183; fig 19; note: Misapplication [details]  Available for editors  PDF available [request] 

additional source Thomas, P.A. (1985). Demospongiae of the Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay. <em>In: Recent Advances in Marine Biology. New Delhi, James, P.S.B.R. (ed.). Today Tomorrow's Printers and Publishers.</em> 205-365.
page(s): 296-297 [details]  Available for editors  PDF available [request] 
 
 Present  Inaccurate  Introduced: alien  Containing type locality 
   

From editor or global species database
Taxonomy Topsent (1904) records this species from deep water off the Azores, emphasizing the similarities with Carter's description. However, he mentions clear spicule size differences between the two, and in view of the geographic distance these specimens are unlikely to be conspecific.  [details]


Website and databases developed and hosted by VLIZ · Page generated 2024-04-24 · contact: Nicole de Voogd