Iphinoe adriatica Bâcescu, 1988

Mazziotti, Cristina & Lezzi, Marco, 2020, The cumacean genus Iphinoe (Crustacea: Peracarida) from Italian waters and I. daphne n. sp. from the northwestern Adriatic Sea, Mediterranean, Zootaxa 4766 (2), pp. 331-357 : 336-337

Iphinoe adriatica Bâcescu, 1988 nomen dubium

“ Iphinoe Vial G ” Zimmer 1942: 169–199.

Remarks. Zimmer (1942) examined some Iphinoe material contained in a “Vial G” from Trieste area 9, concluding that it may either be a new species or conspecific with I. maeotica Sowinsky, 1893 or I. maeotica sensu Calman (1904) . Băcescu (1988) later attributed this material to a new species, I. adriatica . However, Bâcescu had not examined Zimmer’s specimens directly and had only based his considerations on the description provided by Zimmer (1942), which is reported below (translated from German):

“Vial G (11 specimens, some badly damaged, from the northern Adriatic, probably from Trieste): small size, female and male measure just 4 mm in length. High variability in teeth arrangement: a female shows a series of 8 teeth that extends from the posterior margin of the frontal lobe to half the carapace length. The space between the first and second tooth is a little larger than what is observed among the others. Another female shows a series of 4 teeth and one just outlined, which extends from the posterior margin of the frontal lobe to half the carapace length. A female has five teeth arranged approximately as in the type of I. trispinosa . Another female still has a single tooth in half the carapace length. A young female has a series of seven teeth in the same arrangement as the first female described. Another young female is totally devoid of teeth. A toothless male. A male with a set of 4 teeth starting from the posterior margin of the frontal lobe and reaching half the carapace length.”

In addition, Zimmer (1942) described the uropod setae in a table, as follows: uropod peduncle with about 6–10 setae on the inner edge, endopod with 4–5 setae on the inner edge of the first joint and 4–9 setae on the second, exopod with 3–7 setae.

It is clear that the description of this species is insufficient to attribute the “Vial G” material to I. adriatica , or to any other species, since the characteristics analyzed by Zimmer (middorsal teeth, body length) are not accepted as diagnostic traits. Due to the high variability in the number of spines in the basis (6–10) and endopod second joint (4–9), we suggest that the Iphinoe of Zimmer’s Vial G were not adult specimens, which is also suggested by their relatively small size (just 4 mm in length).

Hence, we deduce that the identity of this nominal species is uncertain, due to the insufficient morphological description by Zimmer (1942) and the unavailability of typical material at the Zoologische Staatssammlung München Arthropoda department (personal communication by Stefan Friedrich, collection manager, July 2017), where the original material was deposited according to Bâcescu (1988).

Finally, we conclude that Iphinoe adriatica Băcescu, 1988 can be considered as a nomen dubium because the ICZN requirement 13.1.1 is not satisfied (i.e. it is not accompanied by a description or definition that states in words the characteristics that are claimed to differentiate the taxon from others).