Polyipnus aff. indicus
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4563.3.1 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:B0A3408F-563A-4DD3-94A4-284A2770B0A6 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5936999 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/C5011D20-FFDC-FFFE-FF01-FEFEC5E5AF0A |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Polyipnus aff. indicus |
status |
|
Polyipnus aff. indicus View in CoL
(Figure 20)
1995 Polyipnus indicus Smale MJ, Watson G, Hecht T, p. 30, plate 11, fig. 11–12
Material: 2 specimens in total. Anda1 (1) RGM 962124; Tiep2 (1) RGM 962125 View Materials .
Two specimens—including one well preserved otolith except for its rostral extension—have a relatively high OL:OH body ratio (= 0.79) as compared to the other specimens. The posterior rim is smooth, also in the better preserved specimen. The high OL:OH body ratio is also observed in the extant species Polyipnus indicus (depicted in Smale etal., 1995) and the Chattian species Polyipnus weitzmani (Steurbaut, 1984) . The spine at the onset of the (broken) rostrum is pointed in our specimens, while that depicted by Smale etal. (1995) is larger and blunt. This latter publication also shows shape variation between two specimens of P. indicus ; both contain a smooth posterior rim. More material should be available for drawing more definitive conclusions. On basis of the available material, we consider these specimens closer to P. indicus rather than P. aquavitus .
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 |