Coryphellidae Bergh, 1889
publication ID |
https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlaf057 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D09886E-5D7C-40D1-B86A-118A3ADE5773 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03EF87FE-FF87-FF99-FEEA-F8D6FE5FFD7A |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Coryphellidae Bergh, 1889 |
status |
|
Family Coryphellidae Bergh, 1889 View in CoL
( Figs 1, 2, 13; Table 4)
Subfamily Coryphellinae Bergh 1889: 211 . Coryphellidae View in CoL ‘ Odhner 1939 ’ Odhner in Franc 1968: 881.
‘Genus Flabellina sensu latissimo ’ Gosliner and Griffiths 1981: 105 , 109–15.
Korshunova et al. 2017a, the family Coryphellidae reinstated: 25–7.
Diagnosis: Body wide to narrow. Notal edge reduced, more commonly discontinuous to almost completely reduced, but may also be continuous in several genera. Cerata not stalked, in numerous continuous or discontinuous rows. Rhinophores smooth, wrinkled, rarely annulate or perfoliate. Anus pleuroproctic under a reduced notal edge. Elaborate oral glands commonly absent. Masticatory edges of jaws bear several rows of compound, sharpened or tubercle-like denticles. Radula formula 1.1.1. Central teeth usually with distinct, non-compressed (= undepressed) cusp, more rarely compressed by adjacent lateral denticles to various degrees. Lateral teeth narrow or with attenuated process basally, usually denticulated. Commonly both distal and proximal receptaculum seminis present. Vas deferens usually short, rarely long, with relatively distinct or indistinct prostate. Accessory gland distinct only in the single genus Occidenthella . Massive external permanent penial collar absent. Penis internal, in many cases broad to disk-shaped, more rarely elongated conical, unarmed.
Genera included: Borealea Korshunova et al., 2017 , reinstated, Coryphella Gray, 1850 , restricted, Fjordia Korshunova et al., 2017 , reinstated, Gulenia Korshunova et al., 2017 , reinstated, Himatina Thiele 1931 , reinstated, Itaxia Korshunova et al., 2017 , reinstated, Microchlamylla Korshunova et al., 2017 , reinstated, Occidenthella Korshunova et al., 2017 , reinstated, Orienthella Korshunova et al., 2017 , reinstated, Corrupta gen. nov., and Portorchardia gen. nov.
Remarks: See Results and Discussion and also Remarks in Synopsis of coryphellid genera below. Both analyses in Korshunova et al. (2017a), and the present study, ( Figs 1, 2, 13) reveal a similar topology to the genera Fjordia , Gulenia , Himatina , Coryphella , Borealea , Occidenthella , Orienthella , Microchlamylla , and Itaxia , regardless of the number of analysed specimens and outgroup taxa. Two new genera, Corrupta gen. nov. and Portorchardia gen. nov., were revealed in the present study. Besides this, adding molecular data belonging to the genus Fjordia for Fjordia capensis , and to the genus Orienthella for Orienthella cooperi and Orienthella fogata , which were correctly predicted in Korshunova et al. (2017a) by morphological characteristics (according to the original descriptions), did not affect the tree topology. Genera clustered in distinct and separate clades Fjordia (PP = 1, BS = 98), Gulenia (PP = 1, BS = 98), Himatina (PP = 1, BS = 100), Corrupta gen. nov. (PP = 1, BS = 100), Portorchardia gen. nov. (PP = 1, BS = 100), Coryphella (PP = 1, BS = 100), Borealea (PP = 0.95, BS = 58), Occidenthella (PP = 1, BS = 100), Orienthella (PP = 1, BS = 93), Microchlamylla (PP = 1, BS = 100), and Itaxia (PP = 1, BS = 91) within the family Coryphellidae ( Fig. 13). A comparison of all valid, currently included Coryphellidae genera is presented in Table 5. For genera of the family Coryphellidae we provide detailed diagnoses in order to reinstate them. As we also argued in detail under Remarks to the family Facelinidae (which contains a large number of truly fine-scale genera with morphological differences that are often minor and difficult to properly recognize) if all the genus-level diversity within the family Coryphellidae were lumped together, then inevitably a major part of Facelinidae genus-level diversity (and ultimately, the diversity within all other Aeolidacea families as well, see Discussion) must be synonymized with the oldest facelinid genus Phidiana Gray, 1850 because precisely the same logic of seeming ‘intermediate’ morphology was applied when the genus-level diversity of the family Coryphellidae —with its fine-scale diagnostics comparable to the fine-scale diagnostics of the genera of the family Facelinidae —was lumped into the putatively ‘same’ genus ‘ Coryphella ’ ( Ekimova et al. 2022). Therefore, as a consistent part of general fine-scale taxonomy, thoroughly employed in the present study from the order Nudibranchia downstream to family and genera levels (see Synopsis of all the families of the suborder Aeolidacea above and below), an updated detailed synopsis with respective diagnoses of the recently described genera and two new genera of the family Coryphellidae are provided below ( Figs 1, 2, 13; Table 5).
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 |
Coryphellidae Bergh, 1889
Korshunova, Tatiana, Fletcher, Karin & Martynov, Alexander 2025 |
Coryphellinae
Bergh R 1889: 211 |