| About | | Search taxa | | Taxon tree | | Search literature | | Specimens | | Distribution | | Checklist | | Stats | | Log in |
Polychaeta taxon detailsFilograna Berkeley, 1835
 129563 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:129563)
accepted
Genus
Filograna implexa Berkeley, 1835 (type by monotypy)
Filigrana [Filograna auct. misspelling] · unaccepted (lapsus by Mörch for Filograna )
Filipora Fleming, 1828 · unaccepted (nomen oblitum)
marine,
recent only
feminine
Berkeley, M. J. (1835). Observations upon the Dentalium subulatum of Deshayes. <em>The Zoological Journal.</em> 5: 424-427, plate 19, suppl. plate vol. plate 18., available online at http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13381128 [details]
Description Berkeley description in full: "For the other, Serpula Filograna, I beg leave to propose a new genus which will be...
Description Berkeley description in full: "For the other, Serpula Filograna, I beg leave to propose a new genus which will be characterised by the nature of its opercula and number of branchiae, and may be called Filograna; in which case, Turton's specific name implexa will be very appropriate. Filograna, nob. Shell very slender, filiform, gregarious. Branchiae 8, filiform, of which two bear an infundibuliform obliquely truncate operculum. Mantle rectangular. Fascicles of bristles 7 on each side." [details] Nomenclature Hartman catalogue (p.576) picked up the name Filograna as attributed to Oken from McIntosh's (1923) monograph on Serpulidae...
Nomenclature Hartman catalogue (p.576) picked up the name Filograna as attributed to Oken from McIntosh's (1923) monograph on Serpulidae (p.338). As usual McIntosh compiled a remarkable list of early, sometimes pre-linnaean usages, (including 1697 for a synonym of Filograna implexa, and a Serpula filograna usage by Linnaeus, 1766). He accurately reports Oken's usage of 'Clymene [not the maldanid genus] filograna'. Thus, even on McIntosh's own reporting he is wrong in attributing the authority to Oken, and he also lists (wrongly) Oken's spelling as 'Filigrana' although himself using 'Filograna'. Even if McIntosh was correct and Oken had used the genus name (most works agree he didn't), he could not be the authority as his 1815 work is not available for nomenclature under ICZN Opinion 417. [details]
Read, G.; Fauchald, K. (Ed.) (2024). World Polychaeta Database. Filograna Berkeley, 1835. Accessed at: https://www.marinespecies.org/polychaeta/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=129563 on 2024-04-30
Date action by
original description
Berkeley, M. J. (1835). Observations upon the Dentalium subulatum of Deshayes. <em>The Zoological Journal.</em> 5: 424-427, plate 19, suppl. plate vol. plate 18., available online at http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/13381128 [details]
original description (of Filipora Fleming, 1828) Fleming, J. (1828). A history of British animals, exhibiting the descriptive characters and systematical arrangement of the genera and species of quadrupeds, birds, reptiles, fishes, Mollusca, and Radiata of the United Kingdom; including the indigenous, extirpated, and extinct kinds, together with periodical and occasional visitants. <em>Edinburgh, Bell & Bradfute / London, James Duncan.</em> Pp. i-xxii, 1-565. corrigenda., available online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/18569 page(s): 530 [details] taxonomy source McIntosh, W.C. 1923. A monograph of the British marine annelids. Polychaeta, Sabellidae to Serpulidae. With additions to the British marine Polychaeta during the publication of the monograph. Ray Society of London, 4(2): 251-538. page(s): 338 [details] additional source Hove, Harry A. ten.; Kupriyanova, Elena K. (2009). Taxonomy of Serpulidae (Annelida, Polychaeta): The state of affairs. <em>Zootaxa.</em> 2036: 1-126., available online at http://www.mapress.com/j/zt/issue/view/2173 page(s): 42 [details] additional source Fauchald, K. (1977). The polychaete worms, definitions and keys to the orders, families and genera. <em>Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County: Los Angeles, CA (USA), Science Series.</em> 28:1-188., available online at http://www.vliz.be/imisdocs/publications/123110.pdf [details] additional source Bellan, G. (2001). Polychaeta, <i>in</i>: Costello, M.J. <i>et al.</i> (Ed.) (2001). European register of marine species: a check-list of the marine species in Europe and a bibliography of guides to their identification. <em>Collection Patrimoines Naturels.</em> 50: 214-231. (look up in IMIS) [details] additional source Day, J. H. (1967). [Sedentaria] A monograph on the Polychaeta of Southern Africa. Part 2. Sedentaria. British Museum (Natural History), London. pp. 459–842., available online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/8596 [details] From editor or global species database
Description Berkeley description in full: "For the other, Serpula Filograna, I beg leave to propose a new genus which will be characterised by the nature of its opercula and number of branchiae, and may be called Filograna; in which case, Turton's specific name implexa will be very appropriate.Filograna, nob. Shell very slender, filiform, gregarious. Branchiae 8, filiform, of which two bear an infundibuliform obliquely truncate operculum. Mantle rectangular. Fascicles of bristles 7 on each side." [details] Editor's comment The genus Filograna has been attributed to Oken (1815) by e.g. Hartman (1959). However, Oken used filograna as species name in the combination Clymene filograna, S.(erpula) filograna; the species name was elevated to generic rank by Berkeley (1835). [details] Nomenclature Hartman catalogue (p.576) picked up the name Filograna as attributed to Oken from McIntosh's (1923) monograph on Serpulidae (p.338). As usual McIntosh compiled a remarkable list of early, sometimes pre-linnaean usages, (including 1697 for a synonym of Filograna implexa, and a Serpula filograna usage by Linnaeus, 1766). He accurately reports Oken's usage of 'Clymene [not the maldanid genus] filograna'. Thus, even on McIntosh's own reporting he is wrong in attributing the authority to Oken, and he also lists (wrongly) Oken's spelling as 'Filigrana' although himself using 'Filograna'. Even if McIntosh was correct and Oken had used the genus name (most works agree he didn't), he could not be the authority as his 1815 work is not available for nomenclature under ICZN Opinion 417. [details] |
