WoRMS source details
McIntosh, William Carmichael [as M'Intosh]. (1876). On British Annelida. Part I. Euphrosynidae, Amphinomidae, Aphroditidae, Polynoidae, Acoetidae, and Sigalionidae. Transactions of the Zoological Society of London. 9(7): 371-394, plates LXVII-LXX.
50968
10.1111/j.1096-3642.1976.tb00243.x [view]
McIntosh, William Carmichael [as M'Intosh]
1876
On British Annelida. Part I. Euphrosynidae, Amphinomidae, Aphroditidae, Polynoidae, Acoetidae, and Sigalionidae.
Transactions of the Zoological Society of London
9(7): 371-394, plates LXVII-LXX
Publication
AnnelidaBase
World Polychaeta Database (WPolyDb). The article was read 19 May, 1974, but at the bottom of p.371 the date of publication is given as January 1876 for vol 9 issue 7
World Polychaeta Database (WPolyDb). The article was read 19 May, 1974, but at the bottom of p.371 the date of publication is given as January 1876 for vol 9 issue 7
[None. Begins:]
In the first of a series of papers on the British Marine Annelida, which I propose to offer to the Society, one or two reflections which have occurred during the study of the present forms may not be inappropriate, especially as they apply with equal force to the succeeding groups. Few students of the Annelida proceed far in their investigations before becoming aware that in many of the descriptions of their predecessors there is nothing decisive, and that they must wade through many superficial remarks without being able to lay hold of any stable character by which to extricate themselves from doubt. In some cases it would almost seem that the authors meant their successors to spend valuable time to little purpose in vainly endeavouring to find out the exact nature of the species, of which they themselves entertained only a hazy conception. It would appear in the majority of these instances that such inadequate and unsatisfactory descriptions have been due to the fact that the nice distinctions between closely allied forms have hitherto attracted little attention and less study. It is impossible, for example, to describe too minutely in groups like the Polynoide, in which the specific separation rests on so many fine characters. The mere statement that a bristle is slender and serrated conveys little more to the mind of an observer than the assertion, in comparing the hair of the bat with that of the sheep, that each is serrated. Even some of the most distinguished modern investigators of the Annelida have failed to appreciate the valuable results derived from a strict and faithful apprehension of the structure of the bristles, the other characters of course being duly attended to. If, instead of writing pages of weary Latin descriptions, a few terse sentences had been given, and a single characteristic bristle accurately figured by the author, very great labour and not a little doubt would have been saved to his successors.
In the first of a series of papers on the British Marine Annelida, which I propose to offer to the Society, one or two reflections which have occurred during the study of the present forms may not be inappropriate, especially as they apply with equal force to the succeeding groups. Few students of the Annelida proceed far in their investigations before becoming aware that in many of the descriptions of their predecessors there is nothing decisive, and that they must wade through many superficial remarks without being able to lay hold of any stable character by which to extricate themselves from doubt. In some cases it would almost seem that the authors meant their successors to spend valuable time to little purpose in vainly endeavouring to find out the exact nature of the species, of which they themselves entertained only a hazy conception. It would appear in the majority of these instances that such inadequate and unsatisfactory descriptions have been due to the fact that the nice distinctions between closely allied forms have hitherto attracted little attention and less study. It is impossible, for example, to describe too minutely in groups like the Polynoide, in which the specific separation rests on so many fine characters. The mere statement that a bristle is slender and serrated conveys little more to the mind of an observer than the assertion, in comparing the hair of the bat with that of the sheep, that each is serrated. Even some of the most distinguished modern investigators of the Annelida have failed to appreciate the valuable results derived from a strict and faithful apprehension of the structure of the bristles, the other characters of course being duly attended to. If, instead of writing pages of weary Latin descriptions, a few terse sentences had been given, and a single characteristic bristle accurately figured by the author, very great labour and not a little doubt would have been saved to his successors.
British Islands
Systematics, Taxonomy
Date
action
by
2013-01-12 18:30:12Z
created
db_admin
Aphrodita borealis Johnston, 1840 accepted as Aphrodita aculeata Linnaeus, 1758 (source of synonymy)
Euphrosyne borealis Örsted, 1842 accepted as Euphrosine borealis Örsted, 1842 (additional source)
Euphrosyne foliosa Audouin & Milne Edwards, 1833 accepted as Euphrosine foliosa Audouin & H Milne Edwards, 1833 (additional source)
Eurythoe borealis M. Sars, 1862 accepted as Pareurythoe borealis (M. Sars, 1862) (additional source)
Harmothoe antilopes McIntosh, 1876 (original description)
Harmothoe haliaeti McIntosh, 1876 (original description)
Harmothoe macleodi McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Malmgreniella ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) accepted as Malmgrenia ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) (original description)
Harmothoe marphysae McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Malmgrenia marphysae (McIntosh, 1876) (original description)
Harmothoe sibbaldii McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Harmothoe spinifera (Ehlers, 1864) (original description)
Harmothoe zetlandica (McIntosh, 1876) accepted as Malmgreniella ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) accepted as Malmgrenia ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) (original description)
Hermadion assimile McIntosh, 1874 accepted as Adyte assimilis (McIntosh, 1874) accepted as Adyte hyalina (G.O. Sars, 1873) (additional source)
Malmgrenia andreapolis McIntosh, 1874 (redescription)
Malmgrenia castanea McIntosh, 1876 (original description)
Sigalion buskii McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Sigalion squamosus Delle Chiaje, 1830 (original description)
Spinther oniscoides Johnson, 1845 (additional source)
Sthenelais zetlandica McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Fimbriosthenelais zetlandica (McIntosh, 1876) (original description)
Euphrosyne borealis Örsted, 1842 accepted as Euphrosine borealis Örsted, 1842 (additional source)
Euphrosyne foliosa Audouin & Milne Edwards, 1833 accepted as Euphrosine foliosa Audouin & H Milne Edwards, 1833 (additional source)
Eurythoe borealis M. Sars, 1862 accepted as Pareurythoe borealis (M. Sars, 1862) (additional source)
Harmothoe antilopes McIntosh, 1876 (original description)
Harmothoe haliaeti McIntosh, 1876 (original description)
Harmothoe macleodi McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Malmgreniella ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) accepted as Malmgrenia ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) (original description)
Harmothoe marphysae McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Malmgrenia marphysae (McIntosh, 1876) (original description)
Harmothoe sibbaldii McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Harmothoe spinifera (Ehlers, 1864) (original description)
Harmothoe zetlandica (McIntosh, 1876) accepted as Malmgreniella ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) accepted as Malmgrenia ljungmani (Malmgren, 1867) (original description)
Hermadion assimile McIntosh, 1874 accepted as Adyte assimilis (McIntosh, 1874) accepted as Adyte hyalina (G.O. Sars, 1873) (additional source)
Malmgrenia andreapolis McIntosh, 1874 (redescription)
Malmgrenia castanea McIntosh, 1876 (original description)
Sigalion buskii McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Sigalion squamosus Delle Chiaje, 1830 (original description)
Spinther oniscoides Johnson, 1845 (additional source)
Sthenelais zetlandica McIntosh, 1876 accepted as Fimbriosthenelais zetlandica (McIntosh, 1876) (original description)
Type locality
dredged in 90 fathoms off North Unst, Shetland Islands [details]
