WoRMS taxon details
Monoplacophora
Order Neopilinida
marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
recent + fossil
Wenz W. 1940. Ursprung und frühe Stammesgeschichte der Gastropoden. <i>Archiv für Molluskenkunde</i> 72: 1-110. [details]
MolluscaBase eds. (2023). MolluscaBase. Monoplacophora. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=415 on 2023-10-03
Date
action
by
2004-12-21 15:54:05Z
created
db_admin
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
original description
Wenz W. 1940. Ursprung und frühe Stammesgeschichte der Gastropoden. <i>Archiv für Molluskenkunde</i> 72: 1-110. [details]
context source (PeRMS) Ramírez, R.; Paredes, C.; Arenas, J. (2003). Moluscos del Perú. <em>Revista de Biologia Tropical.</em> 51(supplement 3): 225-284. [details] Available for editors
[request]
basis of record An outline for the classification of Phylum Mollusca in taxonomic databases [report elaborated by WoRMS editors for internal use, june 2010] [details]
context source (PeRMS) Ramírez, R.; Paredes, C.; Arenas, J. (2003). Moluscos del Perú. <em>Revista de Biologia Tropical.</em> 51(supplement 3): 225-284. [details] Available for editors
[request] basis of record An outline for the classification of Phylum Mollusca in taxonomic databases [report elaborated by WoRMS editors for internal use, june 2010] [details]
Present Inaccurate Introduced: alien Containing type locality
From editor or global species database
Classification The only classification problem with modern monoplacophorans is the discussion around using Monoplacophora Odhner, 1940 vs. Tryblidiida. Monoplacophora sl. as defined in Runnegar & Jell (1976) would include three orders among which Tryblidiida. Problems arise from the ambiguous position of some paleozoic fossil taxa which could be monoplacophorans or gastropods, or (worse) stem-group gastropods derived from monoplacophorans, thus making Monoplacophora paraphyletic. Preference for the name Tryblidiida follows Waller's (1998) conclusion that these are the sister-group to all other Conchifera, thus escaping being paraphyletic. Giribet et al. (2006: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103, 7723-7728) claimed that the monoplacophoran Laevipilina is recovered within a branch containing polyplacophoran taxa in an analysis including several nuclear and mitochondrial sequences. As mentioned above, this result based on a very small specimen is ignored in the classification draft until further confirmed. [details]
