|
Porifera taxon details
original description
Topsent, E. (1916). Diagnoses d'éponges recueillies dans l'Antarctique par le Pourquoi-Pas?. <em>Bulletin du Muséum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris.</em> (1) 22(3): 163-172. page(s): 170 [details]
original description
Topsent, E. (1917). Spongiaires. Pp. 1-88, pls 1-6. <em>In: Joubin, L. (Ed.), Deuxième Expédition Antarctique Française (1908-1910) Commandée par le Dr. Jean Charcot.</em> Sciences Physiques: Documents Scientifiques (Paris). 4. (Masson & Cie: Paris). page(s): 73-74 [details]
context source (Deepsea)
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO. The Ocean Biogeographic Information System (OBIS), available online at http://www.iobis.org/ [details]
basis of record
Desqueyroux-Faúndez, R.; Valentine, C. (2002). Family Niphatidae Van Soest, 1980. Pp. 874-890. <em>In: Hooper, J.N.A.; Van Soest, R.W.M. (eds) Systema Porifera. A guide to the classification of sponges. 2 volumes.</em> (Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York. 1708 + xvliii. ISBN 0-306-47260-0 (printed version). [details]
basis of record
Desqueyroux-Faúndez, R.; Valentine, C. (2002 [2004]). Family Niphatidae Van Soest, 1980. Pp. 874-890. <em>In: Hooper, J.N.A.; Van Soest, R.W.M. (eds) Systema Porifera. A guide to the classification of sponges.</em> Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York. 1708 + xvliii. ISBN 978-1-4615-0747-5 (eBook electronic version). [details] Available for editors [request]
additional source
Burton, M. (1929). Porifera. Part II. Antarctic sponges. <em>British Antarctic ('Terra Nova') Expedition, 1910. Natural History Report, London, Zoology.</em> 6 (4): 393-458, pls I-V. page(s): 423 [details]
Unknown type MNHN DT 691, geounit Antarctic Peninsula [details]
Unknown type MNHN DT 691, geounit Antarctic Peninsula [details]
Unknown type MNHN DT 691, geounit Antarctic Peninsula [details]
Unknown type MNHN DT 692, geounit Antarctic Peninsula [details]
Unknown type MNHN DT 693, geounit Antarctic Peninsula [details]
From editor or global species database
Synonymy Burton (1932: 271), followed by Koltun (1964: 105) and Hooper & Wiedenmayer (1994: 321) considered this a junior synonym of Microxina benedeni (Topsent, 1901). However, Desqueyroux-Faúndez & Valentine (2002) disputed this because the type specimens of the two differ clearly in microsclere content, M. benedeni possessing sigmas, M. charcoti possessing microxeas. Gocke & Janussen (2013: 80) question the genus membership of M.benedeni as its type lacks microxeas, a key character for Microxina.. [details]
|
| |