Muricea plantaginea (Valenciennes, 1846)

Horvath, Elizabeth Anne, 2019, A review of gorgonian coral species (Cnidaria, Octocorallia, Alcyonacea) held in the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History research collection: focus on species from Scleraxonia, Holaxonia, Calcaxonia - Part II: Species of Holaxonia, families Gorgoniidae and Plexauridae, ZooKeys 860, pp. 67-182 : 67

Muricea plantaginea (Valenciennes, 1846) Figure 42 A–K

Gorgonia plantaginea Valenciennes, 1846: pl 15.

nec Gorgonia plantaginea Lamarck, 1815: 163.

nec Eunicea plantaginea Valenciennes, 1855: 13; Milne Edwards and Haime 1857: 146, 151.

Eunicea tabogenesis Duchassaing & Michelotti, 1860: 17; 1864 [1866]: 111. Kükenthal 1924: 145.

Eunicea ransoni Stiasny, 1937: 331, 334-336, figs 5, 6, 7.

? Muricea appressa Verrill, 1864: 37 [January]; 1866: 329; 1868a: 412; 1869a: 444-446; pl VIII, fig. 13. Kükenthal 1919: 752; 1924: 145. Reiss 1929: 390-391. Hardee and Wicksten 1996: 132-136 (syn. n).

Muricea appressa var. flavescens Verrill, 1869a: 446. Kükenthal 1919: 752; Kükenthal 1924: 145 (syn. nov.). Hickson 1928: 371-372. Reiss 1929: 389-390. Stiasny 1943: 72-74.

Muricea plantaginea Lamarck, 1836: 333. Breedy and Guzmán 2016b: 25-32.

Muricea californica Aurivillius, 1931: 111-114 [according to Grigg, 1977: 280, after Grigg, 1970: xiv, 20, 25, 207].

Muricea tenella Verrill, 1869a: 446-448. Kükenthal 1919: 752; 1924: 145. Hickson 1928: 371-372. Reiss 1929: 389-390. Stiasny 1943: 72-74.

Type locality.

Holotype Mazatlán, Mexico, Voyage sur la Frégate La Vénus, MA Du Petit Thouars, 1836-1839. Also, Peru, Tumbes Department, Zorritos, 3-5 fm [6-9 m]. Specimen from NMNH (USNM 33585, and many others) collected in the North Pacific, Panama.

Type specimens.

Syntype YPM 1616A of Muricea appressa var. flavescens . As well, housed at NMNH, USNM 33585, listed as a Syntype, with SEM image #2517; [dry]. Syntype specimen at NMNH was examined.

Material examined.

A number of lots housed in SBMNH collection (see Appendix 1: List of material examined).

Remarks.

Included here is a brief commentary on this species, and an SEM plate (Figure 42 A–K) is provided as a means of comparison, because as Grigg (1977) stated "this could be synonymous with M. californica ." However, the work of Hardee and Wicksten (1996) led them to conclude that M appressa (= M. plantaginea ) is not synonymous with M. californica . Based on my own observations and research, M. appressa is more likely to be found south of the California Bight (Baja, CA Sur, Ecuador, Galápagos, etc.). Johnson and Snook (1927) made mention of storm-washed living specimens of Eunicea Lamouroux, 1816 (but no reference to a species) with the living polyps yellowish white (the black and white photograph of a specimen shown in that volume looked most like a somewhat worn specimen of either M. californica , or perhaps M. fruticosa typical). While those identified as M. appressa in the SBMNH collection generally seemed more prickly in overall appearance (as compared to M. californica ), along with slightly smaller-diameter branches, any cursory visual inspection of gorgonian specimens from this genus could misidentify species. A more intentional study of calyx shape along with further comparisons of sclerites from freshly collected specimens over the total range of the Bight to clarify the possible synonymy of this species with Muricea californica is underway. I am inclined to keep Muricea appressa (= M. plantaginea ) a separate species while this further study is being conducted.

Several additional locations were noted for this species in Verrill’s (1864; 1869a) description: Panamá and the Pearl Islands, in pools at extreme low water; ex. FH Bradley; also, JH Sternbergh and FH Bradley. Also, records from Nicaragua, Corinto; ex. JA McNiel and from Mexico, La Paz; ex. J Pedersen. Note that all of these locations lie well south of the California Bight’s southern boundary.

Compounding the confusion surrounding Muricea species, particularly in the southern portion of California’s geographical range, is that in the following description of Muricea fruticosa , two very distinct colony forms must be mentioned: that which looks very much like the typical Muricea californica (the typical colony shape, albeit with white polyps, according to most encountering it in the field) and that with a far smaller, stiffer, shorter-branched cespitose or fruticose bushy shape, a distinctly different variant of M. fruticosa according to Verrill (1868a; 1869a). As this latter variant is not encountered in the southern California Bight it is not discussed here.