Bipora Whitelegge, 1887

Bock, Philip E. & Cook, Patricia L., 2004, A review of Australian Conescharellinidae (Bryozoa: Cheilostomata), Memoirs of Museum Victoria 61 (2), pp. 135-182 : 163

Bipora Whitelegge, 1887

Bipora Whitelegge, 1887: 340 (part).— Levinsen, 1909: 312.—

Harmer, 1957: 754.

Type species. Flabellipora [sic] flabellaris Levinsen, 1909 (subsequent designation by Levinsen, 1909).

Description. Colony fan-shaped, laterally flattened, zooids arranged in 2 apposing, frontally budded expanses, separated by a series of cancelli, visible antapically. Orifices sinuate, with paired condyles, surrounded by a peristome that is not prominent. Avicularia small and rounded, with a bar but no ligula. Root pores lunate, paired, adapical. Ovicells not known, but adapical pore present.

Remarks. Whitelegge (1887) described seven species that he assigned to Bipora but did not indicate a type species. He assigned specimens from Port Jackson to “ Bipora (?) elegans ” of d’Orbigny (1852) somewhat doubtfully, remarking “if this species proves to be different (as I think it will) from the fossil form described by d’Orbigny as Flabellopora elegans , it can remain as B. elegans Waters ”. D’Orbigny’s species was not a fossil: Whitelegge’s reference was to a remark by Waters (1887 a: 71) who mentioned receiving a specimen of “ Flabellopora elegans ” from New South Wales that grew in an “irregular subcrescentic form with two layers of zooecia separated by a cellular structure formed of avicularian cells”. This specimen was apparently from Brazier, as Waters (1887: 200) listed specimens from Port Stephens (from approximately 13–15 m depth), collected by him, some of which had “between the layers a cancellous structure”. Waters’ figures (pl. 5 figs 13–17) leave no doubt that they represent “ Bipora flabellaris ”, even though Waters (1889) remarked that Whitelegge had “favoured me with further specimens of Flabellopora elegans, d’Orb. , and I feel no doubt as to the correctness of my identification”. However, Waters later (1905, 1921) amended this view and stated that he had adopted Levinsen’s name. Levinsen (1909) had somewhat informally and irregularly designated Flabellipora [sic] elegans Waters (1887) not d’Orbigny (1852), that he then renamed Flabellipora flabellaris , as the type species of Bipora . Harmer (1957: 755) remarked that “ Bipora is a genus of uncertain validity” but that B. flabellaris was the only species mentioned by Whitelegge (1887: 346), as Bipora (?) elegans , that would be available as type species, as all the other species had subsequently been referred either to Conescharellina or Flabellopora . Presumably, the type specimens of B. flabellaris are among those figured by Waters (1887). Harmer (1957: 755) incorrectly listed the registration numbers of some specimens in the collections of the Natural History Museum. The numbers should read “99.5.1.1147” indicating Hincks’ material and “97.5.1.807” indicating Bracebridge Wilson material. Harmer concluded that there seemed to be “sufficient reason for regarding Bipora , with this genotype” (i.e. B. flabellaris ) “as a distinct genus of Conescharellinidae ”. Lu (1991) described three species of Zeuglopora from the South China Sea as Bipora .

Maplestone (1904: 209) listed specimens of “ Bipora elegans ” among his own collection of fossils from Jimmy’s Point, Victoria. No specimens of Maplestone’s material are extant and it cannot be established whether or not this is the only fossil record of Bipora .