Phascolosoma (Phascolosoma) puntarenae
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2021.740.1283 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:07F1B593-9F4F-4B32-88D9-ADC5CA0BEB84 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4644410 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87A4-D37E-802C-78EA-4517FD4560CD |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Phascolosoma (Phascolosoma) puntarenae |
status |
|
Phascolosoma (Phascolosoma) puntarenae View in CoL (Grube & Örsted in Grube, 1858), reinstatement
Fig. 7 View Fig
Phascolosoma puntarenae Grube & Örsted View in CoL in Grube, 1858: 13 (type locality: Puntarenas, Costa Rica).
Phascolosoma puntarenae View in CoL – Fisher 1952: 430–432, pl. 36, figs 1–2, pl. 37, figs 1–3, pl. 39, fig. 3 (from Gulf of California to Panama, in rocks).
Phascolosoma puntarena – Brusca 1980: 127 (Gulf of California, in rocks).
Phascolosoma nigrescens View in CoL (non Keferstein, 1865) – Cutler et al. 1992: 154–156 ( Costa Rica, in tidal pools and under rocks). — Dean 2001: 63 (Pacific of Costa Rica). — Dean et al. 2010: 63 (Cocos Island, Costa Rica, in calcareous rock, 0–15 m).
Material examined
MEXICO – Guerrero • 1; Roqueta Island ; 16°49′19″ N, 99°54′17″ W; 21 Sep. 2006; in sabellariid tubes; UMAR-SIPU 021 GoogleMaps • 1; La Quebrada ; 16°50′44″ N, 99°54′54″ W; 26 Sep. 2007; depth 15 m, in Pinctada mazatlantica ; SGM leg.; UMAR-SIPU 022 GoogleMaps • 3; Barra de Potosí ; 17°32′19″ N, 101°26′36″ W; 3 Dec. 2010; SGG leg.; UMAR-SIPU 023 GoogleMaps . – Oaxaca • 1; Puerto Escondido ; 15°51′34″ N, 97°03′50″ W; 4 Jul. 2004; SS leg.; UMAR-SIPU 0242 GoogleMaps • Estacahuite Beach ; 15°40′05″N, 96°28′53″W; 10 Sep. 2005; in dead coral; UMAR-SIPU 025 GoogleMaps • 1; Chachacual Bay, Jicaral Beach ; 15°42′39″ N, 96°12′11″ W; 14 Dec. 2006; TRC leg.; depth 1 m, in dead coral; UMAR-SIPU 026 GoogleMaps • 1; San Agustín Bay ; 15°41′21″ N, 96°14′11″ W; 10 Feb. 2007; depth 15.3 m, in Porites ; UMAR-SIPU 027 GoogleMaps • 3; Puerto Ángel Bay ; 15°39′56″ N, 96°29′29″ W; 28 Apr. 2008; TFG leg.; in dead coral; UMAR-SIPU 028 GoogleMaps • 1; Panteón Beach ; 15°39′50″ N, 96°29′42″ W; 27 May 2008; MLY leg.; depth 3 m; UMAR-SIPU 030 GoogleMaps • 1; La Montosa Island ; 15°45′57″ N, 96°05′03″ W; 22 Feb. 2010; RGF and SGG leg.; depth 3.5 m; UMAR-SIPU 031 GoogleMaps • 3; Camarón Beach ; 15°39′45″ N, 96°31′33″ W; 6 Apr. 2013; in dead coral; UMAR-SIPU 032 GoogleMaps • 3; Cerro Hermoso Beach ; 15°58′08″ N, 97°32′06″ W; 29 Apr. 2014; UMAR-SIPU 033 GoogleMaps .
Description
Trunk 10 mm in length ( Fig. 7A View Fig ). Light brown trunk with uniform dome-shaped papillae, some with black pigment randomly distributed ( Fig. 7D–E View Fig ). Introvert with bands of dark pigmentation and more than 100 complete and incomplete rings of hooks. Hooks with clear streak expanded near midpoint of vertical and middle of horizontal portions ( Fig. 7F–G View Fig ). Secondary tooth almost indistinct, protuberance of streak short. Fourteen tentacles encircling nuchal organ ( Fig. 7C View Fig ). Longitudinal muscles of body wall gathered into anastomosing bands. Four retractor muscles. Nephridia about 40% of trunk length, open at same level as anus ( Fig. 7B View Fig ). Spindle muscle attached posteriorly.
Remarks
Cutler & Cutler (1990) considered Phascolosoma (P.) puntarenae from Puntarenas, Costa Rica, as a synonym of P. (P.) nigrescens from Fiji. Nevertheless, we found a difference between the hooks of the type material of P. nigrescens illustrated by Selenka (1883) and those in the illustrations of Fisher (1952) of P. puntarenae from Baja California, Costa Rica and Panama. The hooks of P. nigrescens have a conspicuous secondary tooth and the protuberance of the streak is a sharp point, whereas the hooks of P. puntarenae do not have a well-developed secondary tooth and the protuberance of the streak is a flattened point ( Fig. 8F–G View Fig ).
Habitat
Intertidal to subtidal (15 m); in sabellariid tubes, as epibionts of Pinctada mazatlanica , in dead coral and in Porites .
Distribution
From the Gulf of California to Panama.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
|
SubGenus |
Phascolosoma |
Phascolosoma (Phascolosoma) puntarenae
Silva-Morales, Itzahí & Gómez-Vásquez, Julio D. 2021 |
Phascolosoma nigrescens
Dean H. K. & Sibaja & Cordero J. A. & Cortes J. & Vargas R. & Kawauchi G. Y. 2010: 63 |
Dean H. K. 2001: 63 |
Cutler N. J. & Cutler E. B. & Vargas J. A. 1992: 154 |
Phascolosoma puntarena
Brusca R. C. 1980: 127 |
Phascolosoma puntarenae
Fisher W. K. 1952: 430 |
Phascolosoma puntarenae Grube & Örsted
Grube E. 1858: 13 |