Leucandra echinata Schuffner, 1877

Van, Rob W. M. & De, Nicole J., 2018, Calcareous sponges of the Western Indian Ocean and Red Sea, Zootaxa 4426 (1), pp. 1-160: 150

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4426.1.1

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:18929E20-5296-4458-8A8A-4F5316A290FD

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/386CC616-DCE7-A5A4-FF67-8DDAFB27F878

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Leucandra echinata Schuffner, 1877
status

 

Leucandra echinata Schuffner, 1877 

Schuffner (1877: 411, pl. 24 fig. 4) described a sycon-like individual from Mauritius, with diactines of 1000–2000 x 50 –80 µm, triactines up to 309 x 20 µm (smaller of about 110 µm were also present), tetractines with basal actines 110 x 18 µm and apical actines 40 x 9 µm. This species haa been interpreted differently by various authors. See for a review Burton (1963: 30 and 248). Ridley (1884: 630) reported a specimen of Schuffner’s species (as Leuconia  ) from D’Arros Island in the Amirantes, but failed to present a description or illustration. Dendy (1913: 23) reporting the species from Cargados Carajos also omitted a description, but provided a photo (his pl. 2 fig. 4) of an alleged specimen of L. echinata  . A secondary homonymy has been caused by Dendy’s (1913) suggestion that Carter’s (1886) Southeast Australian Leuconia echinata  could be a synonym of Schuffner’s species (indicated with a question mark), in the process reassigning Carter’s species to Leucandra  . Burton (l.c.) was not in accord with this and assigned the two as different ‘named species’ to different ‘superspecies’ (our term for Burton’s misguided concept of species in the Calcarea), viz. Leuconia barbata  for Carter’s species and Scypha ciliata  for Schuffner’s species. Re-examination of Schuffner’s and Carter’s material is ultimately necessary to find the proper genus affiliation for Schuffner’s species. For the time being, Leucandra echinata  appears the most proper combination as it is the original combination. Our material did not contain a likely member of Schuffner’s species.