WoRMS name details
Daira inaequipes Dana, 1853
1546125 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:1546125)
uncertain > nomen dubium
Species
Daira Milne-Edwards, 1830 accepted as Paraphronima Claus, 1879
marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
recent only
Dana, J.D. (1853-1855). Crustacea. Part II. <em>In: United States Exploring Expedition. During the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842. Under the command of Charles Wilkes. U. S. N., C. Sherman Printer, Philadelphia.</em> 14: 691-1618. [1855, folio atlas pls. 1-96.]., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40412910
page(s): 993 [details]
page(s): 993 [details]
Status Type material of Daira inaequipes could not be found in any major North American or European institution and is most likely...
Status Type material of Daira inaequipes could not be found in any major North American or European institution and is most likely lost (see Evans 1967). The type locality is the Philippines, off the south end of Mindoro Island, 24 January 1842. The description given by Dana (1853) is inadequate, and the figure of a female (about 4 mm) is very small and lacking in detail, making a specific determination impossible. In the past the specimen cited by Stebbing (1888) has been considered a synonym of B. globiceps (Vinogradov et al. 1982, 1996) but the description provided is extremely brief and does not refer to any significant specific characters of Brachyscelus. His specimen, a juvenile, could not be found in the NHM. It was most likely mounted on a microscope slide, now lost or not kept. Thus, this species should be considered a nomen dubium. [details]
Horton, T.; Lowry, J.; De Broyer, C.; Bellan-Santini, D.; Copilas-Ciocianu, D.; Corbari, L.; Costello, M.J.; Daneliya, M.; Dauvin, J.-C.; Fišer, C.; Gasca, R.; Grabowski, M.; Guerra-García, J.M.; Hendrycks, E.; Hughes, L.; Jaume, D.; Jazdzewski, K.; Kim, Y.-H.; King, R.; Krapp-Schickel, T.; LeCroy, S.; Lörz, A.-N.; Mamos, T.; Senna, A.R.; Serejo, C.; Souza-Filho, J.F.; Tandberg, A.H.; Thomas, J.D.; Thurston, M.; Vader, W.; Väinölä, R.; Valls Domedel, G.; Vonk, R.; White, K.; Zeidler, W. (2024). World Amphipoda Database. Daira inaequipes Dana, 1853. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1546125 on 2024-08-18
Date
action
by
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
original description
Dana, J.D. (1853-1855). Crustacea. Part II. <em>In: United States Exploring Expedition. During the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842. Under the command of Charles Wilkes. U. S. N., C. Sherman Printer, Philadelphia.</em> 14: 691-1618. [1855, folio atlas pls. 1-96.]., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40412910
page(s): 993 [details]
status source Zeidler, W. (2021). A review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Brachyscelidae Stephensen, 1923 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). <em>Zootaxa.</em> 5026 (3): 405–439., available online at https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5026.3.4 [details] Available for editors
[request]
page(s): 993 [details]
status source Zeidler, W. (2021). A review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Brachyscelidae Stephensen, 1923 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). <em>Zootaxa.</em> 5026 (3): 405–439., available online at https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5026.3.4 [details] Available for editors
[request] From editor or global species database
Status Type material of Daira inaequipes could not be found in any major North American or European institution and is most likely lost (see Evans 1967). The type locality is the Philippines, off the south end of Mindoro Island, 24 January 1842. The description given by Dana (1853) is inadequate, and the figure of a female (about 4 mm) is very small and lacking in detail, making a specific determination impossible. In the past the specimen cited by Stebbing (1888) has been considered a synonym of B. globiceps (Vinogradov et al. 1982, 1996) but the description provided is extremely brief and does not refer to any significant specific characters of Brachyscelus. His specimen, a juvenile, could not be found in the NHM. It was most likely mounted on a microscope slide, now lost or not kept. Thus, this species should be considered a nomen dubium. [details]
