Paramphitrite Holthe, 1976

Lavesque, Nicolas, Daffe, Guillemine, Londoño-Mesa, Mario H. & Hutchings, Pat, 2021, Revision of the French Terebellidae sensu stricto (Annelida, Terebelliformia), with descriptions of nine new species, Zootaxa 5038 (1), pp. 1-63 : 36

Paramphitrite Holthe, 1976

Type-species: Paramphitrite tetrabranchia Holthe, 1976 , by original designation.

Diagnosis. (from Hutchings et al. 2021b). Transverse prostomium attached to dorsal surface of upper lip; basal part as a thick crest, eyespots absent; distal part shelf-like. Buccal tentacles all uniformly cylindrical. Peristomium restricted to lips; relatively short upper lip, hood-like; swollen, cushion-like and mid-ventral lower lip. Segment I reduced dorsally, expanded ventrally, with low mid-ventral lobe marginal to mouth; SG II–IV with pairs of low lateral lobes. Anterior segments highly glandular ventrally, with discrete, smooth, rectangular to trapezoidal mid-ventral shields. Two pairs of arborescent branchiae, on SG II–III, much shorter than body width, with short main stems. Rectangular to conical notopodia beginning on segment IV, extending for 13 segments, until SG XVI; notochaetae all medially limbate and distally serrated. Neuropodia beginning on SG V, as low ridges until SG XX, shortly after end of notopodia, and short pinnules posteriorly; neurochaetae as short-handled avicular uncini with high crest, in completely separated double rows, in face-to-face arrangement, on SG XI–XX. Nephridial papillae present on SG III, genital papillae on SG VI–VIII, between parapodial lobes. Pygidium smooth.

Remarks. Recently, Jirkov (2020) proposed the synonymy between the genera Paramphitrite and Amphitrite . This synonymy is not followed here, as the characters mentioned by this author are perceived as being variable within both genera. As in the case of many other genera of Terebellidae , the variability of some characters, such as the number of the thoracic chaetigers, the number of pairs of nephridial papillae, or the arrangement of the double rows of uncini, among others, are shared with animals of several other genera, and cannot be used to synonymise genera. On the contrary, it supports our view about the need to find additional morphological characters in order to perform a more robust revision of the genera, supported by molecular data. Ideally and whenever possible, it should include the redescription of the type species of each genus.