Dear Barbara and colleagues,
Many former specialists have relied upon the available information, descriptions or illustrations. to evaluate the morphological distinction of species. There is, fortunately, a growing trend for comparing type or topotype materials with the regional specimens, and it seems that widespread or cosmopolitan species are not really as common as they were regarded in the past.
If no time or specimens are available, may I suggest to incorporate in any faunistic study, some remarks about the type locality and ecological data, such that taking into account these biogeographical data would reinforce or contradict any supposed synonymy?
Have fun,
Sergio
> Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 18:00:55 +0200
> From: Michael.Reuscher from gmx.net> Subject: Re: [Annelida] Aricidea assimilis, A. fauveli and A. mutabilis
> To: barbara.mikac from cim.irb.hr; Annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu> CC:
>> Hello Barbara,
> A. (Acmira?) fauveli was described by Olga Hartman after noticing that some specimens described as A. (Aricidea) fragilis in 1936 by Fauvel differed in the shape of the modified neurochaetae from the latter species. I am not sure, however, if she had a look at Fauvel's specimens or if she erected A. fauveli only from drawings in Fauvel's description. Strelzov (1973, 1979) notes that A. fauveli is a junior synonym of Aricidea (Acmira) lopezi lopezi Berkeley & Berkeley, 1956 and that A. fauveli are just bigger specimens of the same species.
> A. (Acmira) assimilis is, according to Strelzov (1973, 1979), not the same species because the modified neurochaetae have a different shape and the number of branchiae differs between A. assimilis and A. fauveli.
> A. (Acmira) mutabilis was described by Laubier and Ramos. Its validity was already doubted by the authors of the original description because they noted the similarity to A. assimilis and A. fauveli. Katzmann and Laubier (1975) confirmed the synonymy of the three species. Since A. assimilis and A. fauveli do not seem to be the same species, it remains to be seen which one of the two is the senior synonym. Looking at the descriptions, A. mutabilis might well be a junior synonym of A. assimilis.
> So to sum this up:
> 1) A. (Acmira) assimilis Tebble, 1959 seems to be a valid species
> 2) A. (Acmira?) fauveli Hartman, 1957 seems to be a junior synonym of A. (Acmira) lopezi lopezi
> 3) A. (Acmira) mutabilis) Laubier & Ramos, 1974 seems to be a junior synonym of A. (Acmira) assimilis
>> I hope this helps to resolves the confusion,
> Michael
>> --
> Neu: GMX De-Mail - Einfach wie E-Mail, sicher wie ein Brief!
> Jetzt De-Mail-Adresse reservieren: http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/demail>> _______________________________________________
> Annelida mailing list
> Post: Annelida from net.bio.net> Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida> Resources: http://www.annelida.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20100918/8c9a263b/attachment.html
