|
WoRMS name details
original description
Burton, M. (1926). Descriptions of South African sponges collected in the South African Marine Survey. Part I. Myxospongida and Astrotetraxonida. <em>Fisheries Bulletin. Fisheries and Marine Biological Survey Division, Union of South Africa.</em> Report 4, Special Report 9 (6): 1-29. page(s): 6 [details]
basis of record
Van Soest, R.W.M. (2024). Correcting sponge names: nomenclatural update of lower taxa level Porifera. <em>Zootaxa.</em> 5398(1): 1-122., available online at https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5398.1.1 page(s): 61 [details] Available for editors [request]
additional source
Samaai, T. (2006). Biodiversity "hotspots", patterns of richness and endemism, and distribution of marine sponges in South Africa based on actual and interpolation data: A comparative approach. <em>Zootaxa.</em> 1358: 1-37. [details] Available for editors [request]
Syntype BMNH 1924.5.1.20-26, geounit Agulhas Bank [details]
From editor or global species database
Synonymy The variety was described by Burton from the Agulhas Bank, South Africa, 29.7367°S 31.3458°E, depth 50 m (syntypes BMNH 1924.5.1.20–26, and 2 slides). It differs from the typical variety S. agulhana Von Lendenfeld (1907: 269, from Agulhas Bank, South Africa, 35.4467°S 20.9367°E, depth 84 m, type material consisting of slides BMNH 1908.2.29.138–142) in the paucity of the large oxyasters, but all other features were the same in both varieties. The typical variety was also reported by Burton from the same locality as the present variety. The fact that the large oxyasters were present, be it in small numbers, is hardly sufficient to recognize two distinct taxa. In view of the sympatric occurrence, Van Soest (2024: 61) proposed to merge the varieties in a single species to be named Stelletta agulhana Von Lendenfeld, 1907. There is perhaps reason for doubt about this name, because Burton l.c. and Lévi (1963: 232) did not find any anatriaenes in their specimens identified as S. agulhana, whereas these were reported as common in the type material by Von Lendenfeld l.c. and Samaai & Gibbons (2005: 12). The latter authors suggested that Burton’s and Lévi’s specimens could belong to a closely related but separate species. If that would be the case, the name paucistella Burton, 1926 would be available for it. Van Soest refrained from formalizing this possibility until a proper study of the variability of these Stelletta agulhana specimens has been made. [details]
|
| |