| About | | Search taxa | | Taxon tree | | Search literature | | Specimens | | Distribution | | Checklist | | Stats | | Log in |
Polychaeta name detailsCirratulispio McIntosh, 1911
325160 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:325160)
uncertain > nomen dubium (indeterminable from description)
Genus
Cirratulispio caulleryi McIntosh, 1915 (type by monotypy)
marine,
recent only
McIntosh, W.C. 1911. Notes from the Gatty Marine Laboratory, St. Andrews. No. 32. 1. On the American Syllides verrilli, Percy Moore, from Woods Hole, Mass. 2. On Nevaya whiteavesi, a form with certain relationships to Sclerocheilus, Grube, from Canada. 3. On the British Cirratulidae. 4. On the Cirratulidae dredged by the H.M.S. 'Porcupine' in 1869 and 1870. 5. On the Cirratulidae dreged in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada by Dr. Whiteaves. 6. On the Cirratulidae dredged in Norway by Canon Norman. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 7: 145-173.
page(s): 167 [A worm is described, named 'Cirratulispio', but no species name is assigned] [details]
Description McIntosh (1911) described the unnamed species as "A peculiar form, which may temporarily be termed Cirratulispio, was...
Description McIntosh (1911) described the unnamed species as "A peculiar form, which may temporarily be termed Cirratulispio, was dredged in the ' Porcupine' Expedition of 1869 in 378 fathoms in sticky mud off the coast of Ireland. The mud contained fragments of foraminifera, coccoliths, and sandy debris. The head (Pl. VI. fig. 7) is bluntly conical and the sides of the cone slightly hollowed. A pair of slender tentacles pass from the bristled segment immediately behind, and therefore apparently posterior to the buccal ring. The body is filiform and elongated, probably 2-3 inches in length, apparently tubicolous, and it is imperfect posteriorly ; but at least two regions are recognizable--namely, the anterior with nine pairs of well-marked pale golden bristles, and the succeeding division [details]
Read, G.; Fauchald, K. (Ed.) (2021). World Polychaeta database. Cirratulispio McIntosh, 1911. Accessed at: http://www.marinespecies.org/polychaeta/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=325160 on 2024-04-19
Date action by
original description
McIntosh, W.C. 1911. Notes from the Gatty Marine Laboratory, St. Andrews. No. 32. 1. On the American Syllides verrilli, Percy Moore, from Woods Hole, Mass. 2. On Nevaya whiteavesi, a form with certain relationships to Sclerocheilus, Grube, from Canada. 3. On the British Cirratulidae. 4. On the Cirratulidae dredged by the H.M.S. 'Porcupine' in 1869 and 1870. 5. On the Cirratulidae dreged in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada by Dr. Whiteaves. 6. On the Cirratulidae dredged in Norway by Canon Norman. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 7: 145-173.
page(s): 167 [A worm is described, named 'Cirratulispio', but no species name is assigned] [details] redescription McIntosh, William Carmichel. (1915). Polychaeta, Opheliidae to Ammocharidae. <em>A Monograph of the British Marine Annelids.</em> The Ray Society, London, 3 (1): i-viii, 1-368 (text)., available online at https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/38532650 page(s): 268 [details]  status source Hartman, Olga. (1959). Catalogue of the Polychaetous Annelids of the World. Parts 1 and 2. <em>Allan Hancock Foundation Occasional Paper.</em> 23: 1-628. page(s): 402 [Hartman states that regarded as perhaps a Cirratulus or Chaetozone] [details] Available for editors  [request] From editor or global species database
Description McIntosh (1911) described the unnamed species as "A peculiar form, which may temporarily be termed Cirratulispio, was dredged in the ' Porcupine' Expedition of 1869 in 378 fathoms in sticky mud off the coast of Ireland. The mud contained fragments of foraminifera, coccoliths, and sandy debris. The head (Pl. VI. fig. 7) is bluntly conical and the sides of the cone slightly hollowed. A pair of slender tentacles pass from the bristled segment immediately behind, and therefore apparently posterior to the buccal ring. The body is filiform and elongated, probably 2-3 inches in length, apparently tubicolous, and it is imperfect posteriorly ; but at least two regions are recognizable--namely, the anterior with nine pairs of well-marked pale golden bristles, and the succeeding division [details]Publication date McIntosh claims 1911 for the date of publication of the genus, and this is the date in Hartman Catalogue. Although McIntosh did not name a species until 1915, the 1911 name is available as McIntosh included a description (ICZN Art 12.1 Names published before 1931.). It could be argued that his description (see above) is of the no-name species rather than defining a genus, but at present this seems irrelevant while the genus is a nomen dubium, and probably unsoundly based on a regenerating specimen (see Fauvel, 1927). [details] |