Sericosura Fry & Hedgpeth 1969
Sericosura species indeterminate. Figure 9 A–C; Plate 3 D–E Material examined. One subadult specimen (NHMUK 2018.19), Southwest Indian Ocean, Coral Seamount, 41˚ 22.31'S, 42˚ 54.57'E, ROV, 732 m, specimen JC066-3440, stn 4.38, mooring site, on net containing Mango wood, 20 November 2011. O...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Other/Unknown Material |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5944888 http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03895C33291E4F15FF01F9C5FAF7FE99 |
| Summary: | Sericosura species indeterminate. Figure 9 A–C; Plate 3 D–E Material examined. One subadult specimen (NHMUK 2018.19), Southwest Indian Ocean, Coral Seamount, 41˚ 22.31'S, 42˚ 54.57'E, ROV, 732 m, specimen JC066-3440, stn 4.38, mooring site, on net containing Mango wood, 20 November 2011. One subadult specimen (NHMUK 2018.20), Southwest Indian Ocean, Coral Seamount, 41˚ 22.31'S, 42˚ 54.57'E, ROV, 732 m, specimen JC 066-1298D, stn 4.38, mooring site, on net containing whale bone, 20 November 2011. Remarks. These specimens are closest to the male specimens from the Walvis Ridge which Child 1882a assigned unconvincingly to S. mitrata (Gordon, 1944) however in the absence of a range of material it is difficult to compare adults and subadults of that little known species. Sericosura mitrata (Gordon, 1944) was described from the MacRobertson Coast Antarctica from 219 m depth and later recorded from Walvis Ridge off SW Africa at 2117–2154 m depth (Child 1982a) and the Ross Sea at 106 m depth (Child 1994a). Child attributed several differences between the female holotype and his two male specimens from Walvis Ridge to sexual dimorphism, but I am of the view that both are distinct species. The two SWIR specimens are subadults, perhaps females, and I suspect that they represent further examples of Child’s Walvis Ridge specimens. Fortuitously Bamber (2009, Fig. 4) reexamined and refigured the female holotype of S. mitrata and corrected several omissions from Gordon’s original description. In doing so Bamber made Child’s identification more tenable but though I am mindful of Bamber’s support for the attribution of the Walvis Ridge specimen to S. mitrata , there are several morphological differences that extend beyond sexual dimorphism and cause me to question Child’s determination. Unlike the holotype of S. mitrata the lateral processes of Child’s specimens are more widely separated (compare Bamber 2009, Fig. 4A), the “clearly seen” transverse body ridges observed by Gordon (Fig. 19b) are not evident, the proboscis is much ... |
|---|