|
WoRMS name details
original description
Hyatt, A. (1877). Revision of the North American Poriferae; with Remarks upon Foreign Species. Part II. <em>Memoirs of the Boston Society of Natural History.</em> 2: 481-554, pls XV-XVII. page(s): 524-525 [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): 22 [details] Available for editors [request]
From editor or global species database
Validity Hyatt’s name is not an available name (as it has a fourth name, ICZN art. 45.5). Apart from Von Lendenfeld’s assignment of this to Euspongia officinalis var. rotunda (Hyatt, 1877 as Spongia officinalis subsp. tubulifera var. rotunda, q.v.), there are no other suggestions in the literature. Hyatt was apparently unaware that Duchassaing & Michelotti corrected the name corlosia to coelosia in the Errata at the end of their book (p. 122). Thus, in accordance with ICZN art. 32.5.1.1 the name must be spelled coelosia. The WPD lists Spongia (Spongia) coelosia as ‘accepted’ but it is incertae sedis (q.v.). I propose to assign Hyatt’s material from Florida provisionally, but in accordance with Von Lendenfeld’s suggestion, to Spongia (Spongia) tubulifera Lamarck, 1814 until it has been re-examined. Van Soest et al. (2020) erroneously proposed the nomen novum Spongia alpheusi Van Soest & Hooper, 2020 for the present name combination as they argued that it was a junior primary homonym of Spongia elongata Lamarck, 1814, but unavailable names cannot enter into homonymy. The nomen novum is void and the name combination is a junior stnonym of Spongia (Spongia) tubulifera Lamarck, 1814 (q.v.). [details]
|
| |