WoRMS name details

Teres Bucquoy, Dautzenberg & Dollfus, 1883

578749  (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:578749)

 unaccepted (Invalid: junior homonym of Teres Boettger, 1878; Teretia is an emendation used as a replacement name)
Genus
marine
recent + fossil
Bucquoy E., Dautzenberg P. & Dollfus G. (1882-1886). Les mollusques marins du Roussillon. Tome Ier. Gastropodes. Paris, J.B. Baillière & fils 570 p., 66 pl. [pp. 1-40, pl. 1-5, february 1882; pp. 41-84, pl. 6-10, august 1882; pp. 85-135, pl. 11-15, february 1883; pp. 136-196, pl. 16-20, august 1883; pp. 197-222, pl. 21-25, january 1884; pp.223-258, pl. 26-30, february 1884; pp. 259-298, pl. 31-35, august 1884; pp.299-342, pl. 36-40, september 1884; p. 343-386, pl. 41-45, february 1885; p. 387-418, pl. 46-50, august 1885; pp. 419-454, pl. pl. 51-60, january 1886; p. 455-486, pl. 56-60, april 1886; p. 487-570, pl. 61-66, october 1886], available online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/103592
page(s): 103; note: as subgenus of Pleurotoma Lamarck, 1899 [details]   
Note Bucquoy, Dautzenberg & Dollfus (1883)...  
Type species Bucquoy, Dautzenberg & Dollfus (1883) designated Pleurotoma anceps Eichwald, 1830 as the type species but encompassed in their concept of this species the Recent representatives now considered a separate species Teretia teres (Forbes, 1844). Therefore, ICZN Art. 70.3 could apply. They refer to a suggestion by Bellardi that Pleurotoma anceps [the fossil species] could deserve a new genus, making preferable this option as the type species. Anyway this has no bearing on current taxonomy, where both species are considered congeneric, if not conspecific.  [details]
MolluscaBase (2018). Teres Bucquoy, Dautzenberg & Dollfus, 1883. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: http://marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=578749 on 2018-05-26
Date
action
by
2011-08-12 18:14:47Z
created
2015-01-24 12:14:57Z
changed

Creative Commons License The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License


original description Bucquoy E., Dautzenberg P. & Dollfus G. (1882-1886). Les mollusques marins du Roussillon. Tome Ier. Gastropodes. Paris, J.B. Baillière & fils 570 p., 66 pl. [pp. 1-40, pl. 1-5, february 1882; pp. 41-84, pl. 6-10, august 1882; pp. 85-135, pl. 11-15, february 1883; pp. 136-196, pl. 16-20, august 1883; pp. 197-222, pl. 21-25, january 1884; pp.223-258, pl. 26-30, february 1884; pp. 259-298, pl. 31-35, august 1884; pp.299-342, pl. 36-40, september 1884; p. 343-386, pl. 41-45, february 1885; p. 387-418, pl. 46-50, august 1885; pp. 419-454, pl. pl. 51-60, january 1886; p. 455-486, pl. 56-60, april 1886; p. 487-570, pl. 61-66, october 1886], available online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/103592
page(s): 103; note: as subgenus of Pleurotoma Lamarck, 1899 [details]   
From editor or global species database
Type species Bucquoy, Dautzenberg & Dollfus (1883) designated Pleurotoma anceps Eichwald, 1830 as the type species but encompassed in their concept of this species the Recent representatives now considered a separate species Teretia teres (Forbes, 1844). Therefore, ICZN Art. 70.3 could apply. They refer to a suggestion by Bellardi that Pleurotoma anceps [the fossil species] could deserve a new genus, making preferable this option as the type species. Anyway this has no bearing on current taxonomy, where both species are considered congeneric, if not conspecific.  [details]