Phyllosyllis albida Ehlers 1897
Phyllosyllis albida Ehlers, 1897 Phyllosyllis albida Ehlers, 1897: 61 –63, pl. 4, fig. 77–80; Augener, 1918: 304 –305; Hartman 1964: 83–84, pl. 26, fig. 3, 4. Not Phyllosyllis albida Ehlers 1913: 494 –495, pl. 33, fig. 7–8 (= Virchowia branchiata) Distribution. Antarctic. Remarks. The original descr...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Other/Unknown Material |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
2004
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://zenodo.org/record/6273328 https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6273328 |
| Summary: | Phyllosyllis albida Ehlers, 1897 Phyllosyllis albida Ehlers, 1897: 61 –63, pl. 4, fig. 77–80; Augener, 1918: 304 –305; Hartman 1964: 83–84, pl. 26, fig. 3, 4. Not Phyllosyllis albida Ehlers 1913: 494 –495, pl. 33, fig. 7–8 (= Virchowia branchiata) Distribution. Antarctic. Remarks. The original description was based on a single damaged specimen, with short equal fusiform dorsal cirri from chaetiger 2. The first segment was interpreted as having chaetae, and two pairs of tentacular cirri. This is probably a misconception, as this is not found in any other autolytine, or syllid. Of course, there may be several hypothetic explanations for this; one is that the first dorsal cirri pair is lost, and what is seen are the two pairs of tentacular cirri; another one is that one of the tentacular cirri pair is lost, and what is seen are one pair of tentacular cirri and first dorsal cirri; a third is that there is only one pair of tentacular cirri, as suggested by San Martín and Alós (1989). The bottom line is, without any material, any explanation is possible. The second description by Ehlers, under the name P. albida, is of a completely different taxon, later described as Autolytus branchiatus (now in Virchowia), with furcating nuchal epaulettes, and alternating club shaped dorsal cirri. Augener's redescription is also of this latter type. Later redescriptions and notes are only referred to Ehlers' first description. Hartman (1965) synonymized Phyllosyllis with Procerastea, but her justification for this is not understood. As there is no type material, confusion of what P. albida is, and unlikely to be recognized if found again, P. albida is considered as nomen dubium. Published as part of Nygren, Arne, 2004, Revision of Autolytinae (Syllidae: Polychaeta)., pp. 1-314 in Zootaxa 680 on pages 195-196, DOI:10.5281/zenodo.157809 |
|---|