identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
115F3E5C111BFFD6FF4D93B8FD48FA3E.text	115F3E5C111BFFD6FF4D93B8FD48FA3E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Barattolites arghadehensis Babazadeh 2022	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Barattolites arghadehensis Babazadeh, 2022</p>
            <p> The genus  Barattolites Vecchio &amp; Hottinger, 2007 displays a simple exoskeleton characterized by the lack of rafters, and the presence of one intercalary beam between two radial main partitions (beams). Two oblique transverse sections have been provided (Babazadeh, 2022, fig. 8D-E), re-illustrated herein in Fig. 3 E-F. The therein indicated intercalary beams (ib) belong in our opinion to the main radial partitions (beams), therefore pointing to the genus  Coleiconus and excluding  Barattolites . In fact, the two mentioned sections might well belong to  Coleiconus minimus , namely one section closer to the cone base (Fig. 3C) and the other in the juvenile part (Fig. 3F). The holotype (Babazadeh, 2022, figs. 6C-D), as almost all other specimens (figs. 8A-C, HI) described as axial sections are instead tangential sections. Therefore, the diagram of the basal cone diameter versus ‘axial cone diameter’ (obviously referring to the cone height in axial sections) with discriminatory field against other taxa is meaningless (Babazadeh, 2022, fig. 5B). Tangential sections do not allow the assessment of either the real cone height or the real cone diameter. Therefore, it is just logical that ‘  Barattolites arghadehensis’ displays ‘a smaller size of the test, narrower apical angle’ compared to  B. trentinarensis Vecchio &amp; Hottinger, 2007 and  B. andhuri Gallardo-Garcia and Serra-Kiel in Serra-Kiel et al. (2016) (Babazadeh, 2022, p. 282). In fact, the tangential sections of ‘  B. arghadehensis ’ can be well related to (sub) axial sections of  Daviesiconus mahallatensis Babazadeh (Fig. 3A). In conclusion, we consider  B. arghadensis as an invalid species representing a mixture of different taxa. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/115F3E5C111BFFD6FF4D93B8FD48FA3E	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Mehdi Hadi, Mehdi;Schlagintweit, Felix	Mehdi Hadi, Mehdi, Schlagintweit, Felix (2024): Comments On “ New Biostratigraphy And Microfacies Analysis Of Eocene Jahrum Formation (Shahrekord Region, High Zagros, West Iran). A Carbonate Platform Within The Neo-Tethys Oceanic Realm ” By Babazadeh And Cluzel [Bsgf (2023)]. Acta Palaeontologica Romaniae 20 (2): 17-24, DOI: 10.35463/j.apr.2024.02.03, URL: https://doi.org/10.35463/j.apr.2024.02.03
115F3E5C111BFFD6FC0990C4FB55FABA.text	115F3E5C111BFFD6FC0990C4FB55FABA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Coleiconus minimus Babazadeh 2022	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Coleiconus minimus Babazadeh, 2022</p>
            <p> These small sized conical forms have been assigned to  Coleiconus Hottinger &amp; Drobne, 1980 (Fig. 3 L-N). The said pseudo-keriothecal wall is not illustrated or discernible in the illustrations provided by Babazadeh (2022). Instead, the specimens of ‘  Coleiconus minimus ’ can be well compared with  Daviesiconus balsilliei (Davies, 1930) , from the Eocene of Pakistan, typically the smaller juvenile forms (Fig. 3 O-S). The only illustrated transverse section provided by Babazadeh (2022, fig. 9E) cuts the cone through its early ontogenetic stage (Fig. 3N comparable to section 3S by Hottinger &amp; Drobne, 1980, pl. 17, fig. 16). In conclusion,  C. minimus is considered as an invalid species, inadequately distinguished from allied forms and might be referable to small specimens of  D. balsilliei that has besides been described by Babazadeh (2022) from the same material. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/115F3E5C111BFFD6FC0990C4FB55FABA	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Mehdi Hadi, Mehdi;Schlagintweit, Felix	Mehdi Hadi, Mehdi, Schlagintweit, Felix (2024): Comments On “ New Biostratigraphy And Microfacies Analysis Of Eocene Jahrum Formation (Shahrekord Region, High Zagros, West Iran). A Carbonate Platform Within The Neo-Tethys Oceanic Realm ” By Babazadeh And Cluzel [Bsgf (2023)]. Acta Palaeontologica Romaniae 20 (2): 17-24, DOI: 10.35463/j.apr.2024.02.03, URL: https://doi.org/10.35463/j.apr.2024.02.03
115F3E5C111BFFD6FF4B97C3FA83FD37.text	115F3E5C111BFFD6FF4B97C3FA83FD37.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Daviesiconus mahallatensis Babazadeh 2022	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Daviesiconus mahallatensis Babazadeh, 2022</p>
            <p> Daviesiconus Hottinger &amp; Drobne, 1980 differs from  Coskinolina Stache, 1875 mainly by the presence of main radial partitions (beams) whereas in the latter the marginal zone is undivided (Fig. 3J).  Coskinolina displays a pseudo-keriothecal wall while the one of  Daviesiconus is simple (non-canaliculate) (Hottinger &amp; Drobne, 1980). This feature is often masked by diagenetic alteration and therefore not included in the present discussion the more as none of the specimens illustrated by Babazadeh (2002) shows this type of wall structure also due to the lacking adequate magnifications. Last but not least, transverse sections of  Daviesiconus and  Coleiconus are almost indistinguishable as both have rather short primary beams only in case that the pseudo-keriothecal wall of the latter is not preserved or recognizable. With respect to (subaxial) sections of ‘  Daviesiconus mahallatensis ’ such as the holotype, these cannot be differentiated from sections of  Coskinolina sistanensis Schlagintweit &amp; Hadi, 2018 described from the Eocene of Eastern Iran (Fig. 3A versus 3G-H). In any case  Coskinolina sistanensis is different with its undivided marginal zone (Fig. 3J) and pseudo-keriothecal wall also not preserved/recognizable in all specimens. It is worth mentioning that the reference of  C. sistanensis has not been included by the authors and consequently also not been included in the discussion and comparisons. On the other side, the only oblique transverse section of ‘  D. mahallatensis ’ showing short radial main partitions (Babazadeh, 2022, fig. 7E) can be well compared with equivalent sections provided for ‘  Coleiconus minimus’. In conclusions, we consider  D. mahallatensis an invalid species representing a mixture of different taxa. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/115F3E5C111BFFD6FF4B97C3FA83FD37	Public Domain	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.		Plazi	Mehdi Hadi, Mehdi;Schlagintweit, Felix	Mehdi Hadi, Mehdi, Schlagintweit, Felix (2024): Comments On “ New Biostratigraphy And Microfacies Analysis Of Eocene Jahrum Formation (Shahrekord Region, High Zagros, West Iran). A Carbonate Platform Within The Neo-Tethys Oceanic Realm ” By Babazadeh And Cluzel [Bsgf (2023)]. Acta Palaeontologica Romaniae 20 (2): 17-24, DOI: 10.35463/j.apr.2024.02.03, URL: https://doi.org/10.35463/j.apr.2024.02.03
