| About | | Search taxa | | Taxon tree | | Search literature | | Specimens | | Distribution | | Checklist | | Stats | | Log in |
Polychaeta taxon detailsProtula simplex (Lea, 1833) †
1346305 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:1346305)
accepted
Species
Teredo simplex I. Lea, 1833 † · unaccepted (original binomen; described in...)
original binomen; described in Mollusca but reclassified as a polychaete
marine,
fossil only
(of Teredo simplex I. Lea, 1833 †) Lea, I. (1833). Contributions to Geology. Carey, Lea and Blanchard, Philadelphia, 227 pp. + 6 pls., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/17592495
page(s): 38, pl. 1, fig. 6 [details]
Taxonomy Lea (1833: 38) had three fragments of fossil tube which he named as a Teredo (Mollusca). His description was as follows:...
Taxonomy Lea (1833: 38) had three fragments of fossil tube which he named as a Teredo (Mollusca). His description was as follows: "Shell thick, slightly curved, smooth exteriorly, tapering. Observations. Possessing but two or three fragments of the shell, it is impossible to make a perfect description. It differs from the navalis (Lam.) in the substance of the shell being thicker, and from the tibialis of Morton in being less thick, the cavity of that shell being very small. It has no transverse striae like the antenautae of Sowerby." Schmidt (1955, not seen) assessed the tube bits as part of a Protula tube, and Turner (1966: 122) duly recorded this status. It seems unlikely the name Protula simplex can be of use outside of the stratigraphy where the fragments were found. Lea states (p.21 in his introductory) that the fossils he received (in England) and studied came from 'rotten' limestone in a bluff above the south-east side of the Alabama River, Claiborne, Alabama, USA, and he believed the era was Tertiary. Turner (1966) gives the era as Eocene. [details]
Read, G.; Fauchald, K. (Ed.) (2025). World Polychaeta Database. Protula simplex (Lea, 1833) †. Accessed at: https://www.marinespecies.org/polychaeta/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1346305 on 2026-07-14
Date action by
original description
(of Teredo simplex I. Lea, 1833 †) Lea, I. (1833). Contributions to Geology. Carey, Lea and Blanchard, Philadelphia, 227 pp. + 6 pls., available online at https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/17592495
page(s): 38, pl. 1, fig. 6 [details] new combination reference Schmidt, Walter J. (1955). Die Tertiären Würmer Österreichs [Tertiary worms of Austria]. <em>[book] Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.</em> Bd. 109, Abhandlung 7. Wien: In Kommission bei Springer, II, 137pp., available online at https://link.springer.com/book/9783211861813 page(s): 21,34 [details] status source Turner, R. D. (1966). <i>A survey and illustrated catalogue of Teredinidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia)</i>. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge (Massachusetts). ix + 265 pp. , available online at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/134382 page(s): 122; note: catalogue listing of original name and repeating the assignment of Schmidt (1955) to Protula in Serpulidae [details] From editor or global species database
Taxonomy Lea (1833: 38) had three fragments of fossil tube which he named as a Teredo (Mollusca). His description was as follows: "Shell thick, slightly curved, smooth exteriorly, tapering. Observations. Possessing but two or three fragments of the shell, it is impossible to make a perfect description. It differs from the navalis (Lam.) in the substance of the shell being thicker, and from the tibialis of Morton in being less thick, the cavity of that shell being very small. It has no transverse striae like the antenautae of Sowerby." Schmidt (1955, not seen) assessed the tube bits as part of a Protula tube, and Turner (1966: 122) duly recorded this status. It seems unlikely the name Protula simplex can be of use outside of the stratigraphy where the fragments were found. Lea states (p.21 in his introductory) that the fossils he received (in England) and studied came from 'rotten' limestone in a bluff above the south-east side of the Alabama River, Claiborne, Alabama, USA, and he believed the era was Tertiary. Turner (1966) gives the era as Eocene. [details] |
