WoRMS name details
Lycaea ochracea Dana, 1853
1548714 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:1548714)
uncertain > nomen dubium
Species
marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
recent only
Dana, J. D. (1852-1853). Crustacea. Part II. <em>United States Exploring Expedition. During the Years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842. Under the Command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N.</em> 14:691-1618., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40412910
page(s): 1017 [details]
page(s): 1017 [details]
Note Lycaea ochracea Dana, 1853 by subsequent...
Type material Lycaea ochracea Dana, 1853 by subsequent designation. Type material could not be found in any major North American museum and is considered lost (see Evans 1967). The type locality is the S.W. Pacific, north of New Zealand, near Sunday Island, April 1840. Although the description and figures of Dana (1853) readily characterise this genus they have been considered insufficient to determine the status of his species. Dana (1853) illustrated a male, probably immature, judging by his figure of A2. His figures characterise a species where the peduncle of U1 is relatively long and the callynophore of A2 of males has a postero-distal bulge. These two characters, combined with the morphology of G2, exclude it from all its congeners except L. vincentii and L. bovallii. Dana’s small illustrations, however, make it difficult to determine the length of the dactyls and the exact position of the bulge on A2. If anything, the dactyls seem short and the antennal bulge is near the distal margin. Thus, it is more like L. vincentii than L. bovallii. However, nomenclatural stability would not be served by re-introducing Dana’s name because his species has not been recorded since first described and the true identity of his species cannot be
confirmed. [details]
confirmed. [details]
Horton, T.; Lowry, J.; De Broyer, C.; Bellan-Santini, D.; Copila?-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. Lycaea ochracea Dana, 1853. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1548714 on 2024-04-18
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
original description
Dana, J. D. (1852-1853). Crustacea. Part II. <em>United States Exploring Expedition. During the Years 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842. Under the Command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N.</em> 14:691-1618., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/40412910
page(s): 1017 [details]
page(s): 1017 [details]
From editor or global species database
Type material Lycaea ochracea Dana, 1853 by subsequent designation. Type material could not be found in any major North American museum and is considered lost (see Evans 1967). The type locality is the S.W. Pacific, north of New Zealand, near Sunday Island, April 1840. Although the description and figures of Dana (1853) readily characterise this genus they have been considered insufficient to determine the status of his species. Dana (1853) illustrated a male, probably immature, judging by his figure of A2. His figures characterise a species where the peduncle of U1 is relatively long and the callynophore of A2 of males has a postero-distal bulge. These two characters, combined with the morphology of G2, exclude it from all its congeners except L. vincentii and L. bovallii. Dana’s small illustrations, however, make it difficult to determine the length of the dactyls and the exact position of the bulge on A2. If anything, the dactyls seem short and the antennal bulge is near the distal margin. Thus, it is more like L. vincentii than L. bovallii. However, nomenclatural stability would not be served by re-introducing Dana’s name because his species has not been recorded since first described and the true identity of his species cannot be confirmed. [details]
