| Introduction | | Search taxa | | Taxon tree | | Specimens | | Attributes | | Literature | | Photo gallery | | Stats | | Log in |
PeRMS taxon detailsArbacia stellata (Blainville, 1825; ?Gmelin, 1791)
marine,
recent only
Not documented
Kroh, A.; Mooi, R. (2025). World Echinoidea Database. Arbacia stellata (Blainville, 1825; ?Gmelin, 1791). Accessed through: Santamaría, J.; Romero, C.; Meza, M. (Eds) (2025) Peruvian Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/Perms/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=513125 on 2025-05-10
Santamaría, J.; Romero, C.; Meza, M. (Eds) (2025). Peruvian Register of Marine Species. Arbacia stellata (Blainville, 1825; ?Gmelin, 1791). Accessed at: https://www.marinespecies.org/Perms/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=513125 on 2025-05-10
Date action by
context source (PeRMS)
Solís-Marín, F. A.; Alvarado, J. J.; Abreu-Pérez, M.; Aguilera, O.; Alió, J.; Bacallado-Aránega, J. J.; Barraza, E.; Benavides-Serrato, M.; Benítez-Villalobos, F.; Betancourt-Fernández, L.; Borges, M.; Brandt, M.; Brogger, M. I.; Borrero-Pérez, G. H.; Buitrón-Sánchez, E.; Campos, L. S.; Cantera, J.; Clemente, S.; Cohen-Renjifo, M.; Coppard, S.; Costa-Lotufo, L. V.; del Valle-García, R.; Díaz, Y.; Díaz de Vivar, M. E.; Díaz-Martínez, J. P.; Durán-González, A.; Epherra, L.; Escolar, M.; Francisco, V.; Freire, C. A.; García-Arrarás, E.; Gil, D. G.; Guarderas, P.; Hadel, V. F.; Hearn, A.; Hernández, J. C.; Hernández-Delgado, E. A.; Herrera-Moreno, A.; Herrero-Pérezrul, M. D.; Hooker, Y.; Honey-Escandón, M. B. I.; Lodeiros, C.; Luzuriaga, M.; Manso, C. L. C.; Martín, A.; Martinez, M. I.; Martínez, S.; Moro-Abad; Mutschke, E.; Navarro, J. C.; Neira, R.; Noriega, N.; Palleiro-Nayar, J. S.; Pérez, A. F.; Pérez-Ruzafa, A.; Prieto-Rios, E.; Reyes, J.; Rodríguez, R.; Rubilar, T.; Sancho-Mejía, T.; Sangil, C.; Silva, J. R. M. C.; Sonnenholzner, J. I.; Ventura, C. R.; Tablado, A.; Tavares, Y.; Tiago, C. G.; Tuya, F.;Williams, S. M. (2013). Appendix. <em>In: J. J. Alvarado & F. A. Solís-Marín (eds), Echinoderm Research and Diversity in Latin America.</em> pp. 471-510. Springer; Berlin & Heidelberg. page(s): 543-654. [details]
basis of record Mortensen, T. (1935). A Monograph of the Echinoidea. II. Bothriocidaroida, Melonechinoida, Lepidocentroida, and Stirodonta, 647 pp., C. A. Reitzel & Oxford University Press, Copenhagen & London. page(s): 575-577 [details] additional source Lessios, H. A., Lockhart, S., Collin, R., Sotil, G., Sanchez-Jerez, P., Zigler, K. S., Perez, A. F., Garrido, M. J., Geyer, L. B., Bernardi, G., Vaquier, V. D., Haroun, R. & Kessing, B. D. 2012. Phylogeography and bindin evolution in Arbacia, a sea urchin genus with an unusual distribution. Molecular Ecology 21, 130-144., available online at https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05303.x [details]  Present Inaccurate Introduced: alien Containing type locality
From editor or global species database
Authority It is a very deplorable fact that there is no certainty that Gmelin's Echinus stellatus is the same as the present species. The diagnosis given by Gmelin (Op. cit. [1788: p. 3174]) "Echinus spinis infimis capillaribus. Habitat in mari americano", of course, does not say anything; but he refers to Tab. XIII. 7 of Seba's "Thesaurus locupl." Ill. "Echinometra purpurea americana". Nobody could tell which species this figure really represents, but, anyhow, it has naked spaces in the interambulacra so that it is quite possible that it really is the present species, and it is by no means certain, as says Clark (Op. cit. 1913 [p. 220]) that Gmelin's and Blainville's Ech. stellatus are not identical. Blainville did not mean to identify his Ech. stellatus with Gmelin's species of the same name, but to establish it as a new species, saying expressly "j'ai etabli cette espece" (Op. cit. [1825] p. 76). Must we then necessarily follow Clark in rejecting the commonly used, excellent name stellata, for the much less appropriate name incisa of A. Agassiz? (That the species incisa is no more recognizable from the original diagnosis than is GmeIin's species stellatus, is of no importance, of course, since we know for certain that Agassiz meant the present species). I do not think it necessary; we may designate the species stellata (Blainville; ? Gmelin) and thus keep the excellent, all known name. In any case I think it objectionable simply to use the name incisa, without giving at the same time the name stellata as a synonym, so that anybody, also when not very familiar with the subject, may be able to see which species is meant with the name. [details]
|
