Suberites lutkenii Morozov, Strelkova, Zimina & Sabirov, 2023, s. lat.

Suberites lutkenii s. lat. Schmidt 1870 Suberites lütkenii : Schmidt 1870, p. 47, Pl. V, fig. 7; Marenzeller 1886, pp. 11–12; Topsent 1913, pp. 25–26; Hentschel 1929, p. 872; Burton 1934, p. 14; Alander 1942, p.79; Laubenfels 1953, pp. 12–13, fig.7. Suberites montalbidus : Carter 1880, p. 256; Carte...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Morozov, Grigori, Strelkova, Natalya Anisimova, Zimina, Olga, Sabirov, Rushan
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:unknown
Published: Zenodo 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10019468
http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03D17677FFCB1946B78FFA10F27B2B49
Description
Summary:Suberites lutkenii s. lat. Schmidt 1870 Suberites lütkenii : Schmidt 1870, p. 47, Pl. V, fig. 7; Marenzeller 1886, pp. 11–12; Topsent 1913, pp. 25–26; Hentschel 1929, p. 872; Burton 1934, p. 14; Alander 1942, p.79; Laubenfels 1953, pp. 12–13, fig.7. Suberites montalbidus : Carter 1880, p. 256; Carter 1882, p. 353; Fristedt 1885, pp. 19–20, Pl. 2, figs. 4a–e; Fristedt 1887, pp. 428–429; Levinsen 1893, pp. 413–414, fig. 23; Lambe 1894, pp. 127–128, pl. III, fig. 6a–c; Lambe 1900, pp. 24–25; Swartschewsky 1906, p. 318 –319, pl. XIII, fig. 3; Morozov et al. 2019, pp. 2973–2975, fig. 8a–h; Suberites spec.: Vosmaer 1882, pp. 32–33; pl. I, figs 22–23; pl. IV, figs 140–144. Suberites domuncula ficus : Koltun 1959, p. 95, figs 66–67; pl. XXXIV, figs 1–3; pl. XXXVI, figs 1–2. Suberites lutkenii Schmidt 1870 is another example of a taxonomically problematic species. Schmidt described a fig-shaped S. lutkenii from the North Sea and East Greenland. According to Schmidt (1870), the choanosomal skeleton of this sponge consisted of loose spicule tracts and single spicules (styles), running along the main body axis; centrotylote microrhabds (both microstrongyles and microxeas) found in the superficial layer. It’s worth mentioning an unusual variety of microsclere allocated by Schmidt (1870, pl. 5, fig. 7b). Most likely this variety can be attributed to the developmental forms of microscleres. Subsequently Carter (1880) allocated a new species obtained from the Barents Sea, which he named Suberites montalbidus , providing a few lines about its general appearance. In the following paper Carter (1882, p. 353) asked himself whether his Suberites montalbidus is synonymous to S. lutkenii described earlier by Schmidt (1870). Later Vosmaer (1882) published a description of sponge dredged in the same area as Carter’s specimens— the Barents Sea. Vosmaer (1882, pp. 32–33) doubted whether to assign his Suberites spec. to S . virgultosus (= Halichondria virgultosa Johnston 1842) or S . montalbidus Carter, 1880. He pointed out at the ...