|
WoRMS name details
original description
Schmidt, O. (1862). Die Spongien des adriatischen Meeres. (Wilhelm Engelmann: Leipzig): i-viii, 1-88, pls 1-7. page(s): 45-46 [details]
basis of record
Rützler, K. (2002). Family Spirastrellidae Ridley & Dendy, 1886. Pp. 220-223. <em>In: Hooper, J.N.A.; Van Soest, R.W.M. (eds) Systema Porifera. A guide to the classification of sponges. 2 volumes.</em> Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York, 1708 + xvliii. ISBN 0-306-47260-0 (printed version). [details] Available for editors [request]
basis of record
Rützler, K. (2002 [2004]). Family Spirastrellidae Ridley & Dendy, 1886. Pp. 220-223. <em>In: Hooper, J.N.A.; Van Soest, R.W.M. (eds) Systema Porifera. A guide to the classification of sponges.</em> Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York, 1708 + xvliii. ISBN 978-1-4615-0747-5 (eBook electronic version). [details] Available for editors [request]
Neotype USNM 1149580, geounit Adriatic Sea [details]
From editor or global species database
Neotype Schmidt's (1862) description and figure (pl. VII fig. 1) leave no doubt that his original material contained diplasters. The only material left with a label in Schmidt's handwriting is a slide in the Natural History Museum in London (no extant material in LMJG), under reg.nr. 1867.3.11.16A. It does not contain diplasters and belongs to Spirastrella cunctatrix. The slide clearly does not belong to the original type material and thus the type must be considered lost, hence a neotype was necessary. The neotype was collected in the same marine ecoregion as the original material (Lesina in Croatia). [details]
Neotype Schmidt's (1862) description and figure (pl. VII fig. 1) leave no doubt that his original material contained diplasters. The only material left with a label in Schmidt's handwriting is a slide in the Natural History Museum in London (no extant material in LMJG), under reg.nr. 1867.3.11.16A. It does not contain diplasters and belongs to Spirastrella cunctatrix. The slide clearly does not belong to the original type material and thus the type must be considered lost, hence a neotype was necessary. The neotype was collected in the same marine ecoregion as the original material (Lesina in Croatia). [details]
|
| |