Pectis Haeckel 1879

Genus Pectis Haeckel, 1879 Pectis Haeckel, 1879: 266; 1881a: 12; 1881b: 14. Voragonema Naumov, 1971: 13 (syn. nov.). Voragonema – Bouillon & Boero 2000: 69, 73. — Bouillon et al. 2006: 113, 121. — Antsulevich 2015: 717–718, 727, 773. Diagnosis Rhopalonematid medusae with dome-shaped umbrella; ex...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Horia R. Galea, Cornelia Roder, Christoph Walcher, Marco Warmuth, Eberhard Kohlberg, Philipp F. Fischer
Format: Other/Unknown Material
Language:unknown
Published: 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:https://zenodo.org/record/5628741
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5628741
Description
Summary:Genus Pectis Haeckel, 1879 Pectis Haeckel, 1879: 266; 1881a: 12; 1881b: 14. Voragonema Naumov, 1971: 13 (syn. nov.). Voragonema – Bouillon & Boero 2000: 69, 73. — Bouillon et al. 2006: 113, 121. — Antsulevich 2015: 717–718, 727, 773. Diagnosis Rhopalonematid medusae with dome-shaped umbrella; exumbrella with numerous, Fne, meridional ridges; subumbrella pigmented; with gastric peduncle; manubrium with or without outer gastric pouches; mouth with 4 simple lips; 8 radial canals connect to the ring canal, the latter giving rise to a varied number of regularly- or irregularly-shaped centripetal canals; 8 narrow, elongated gonads, distally pendant, on the radial canals; tentacles very numerous, in superimposed rows, of two types: outermost large and solid, and innermost thinner, shorter and hollow; statocysts numerous and free. Remarks When Haeckel (1879) described the genus Pectis, he notably emphasized the “eight genitalia in the course of the eight radial canals, between which blind centripetal canals run from the annular canal”. It will be shown in the next section that its type species, P. antarctica Haeckel, 1879, shows all the distinctive characters of the genus Voragonema Naumov, 1971, and in particular of V. laciniata Bouillon et al., 2001. Reversal of precedence (ICZN Art. 23.9) for the generic name cannot be applied for the following reasons: the senior synonym, Pectis, has been used as a valid name after 1899 (e.g., Browne 1903: 29), so Art. 23.9.1.1. is not fulFlled; the junior synonym, Voragonema, has been used, to our knowledge, in only 22 out of the 25 published works etc., required to meet the conditions of Art. 23.9.1.2. The presumed valid name appears in: Naumov (1971), Bouillon (1985), Beliaev (1989), Larson & Harbison (1990), Larson et al. (1991), Bouillon (1993), Gili et al. (1998), Bouillon & Boero (2000), Bouillon et al. (2001), Thuesen (2003), Bouillon et al. (2006), Stepanjants et al. (2006), Stepanjants (2007), Pagès et al. (2007), Hosia et al. (2008), Lindsay & Miyake ...