Cribroperidinium granulatum

granulatum (Klement, 1960, p.39–41, pl.4, figs.10–13; text-figs.18–20) Stover and Evitt, 1978, p.150.  Emendation: Sarjeant, 1984a, p.161–162, as Meristaulax granulata.  Holotype: Klement, 1960, pl.4, figs.10–11; text-figs.18–20; Fensome et al., 1995, figs.1–2 — p.1525; disintegrated according to Sarjeant (1984a, p.162).  Lectotype (designated by Sarjeant, 1984a, p.162): Sarjeant, 1984a, pl.3, figs.3–4; text-fig.3; Jan du Chêne et al., 1986a, pl.27, figs.7–10; Brenner, 1988, pl.3, figs.2a–b; Fensome et al., 1995, figs.5–6 — p.1525 — however, Brenner (1988, p.35) argued that this specimen is not conspecific with the holotype.  Lectotype (designated by Brenner, 1988, p.35): Brenner, 1988, pl.1, figs.3a–c; Fensome et al., 1995, figs.7–9 — p.1525.  Originally Gonyaulax (Appendix B), subsequently Gonyaulacysta, thirdly (and now) Cribroperidinium, fourthly Rhynchodiniopsis, fifthly Meristaulax Sarjeant, sixthly Acanthaulax.  Poulsen (1996, p.73) retained this species in Cribroperidinium.Taxonomic junior synonyms: Gonyaulax (as Cribroperidinium) venusta, according to Schrank (2005, p.56); Gonyaulax (now Cribroperidinium) granuligera, according to Fisher and Riley (1980, p.321) — however, Sarjeant (1984a, p.156–158) retained Gonyaulax (as Cryptarchaeodinium) granuligera; Gonyaulacysta (as Acanthaulax?, now Cribroperidinium) angulosa, according to Fisher and Riley (1980, p.321) — however, Sarjeant and Gocht in Sarjeant (1984a, p.160) retained Gonyaulacysta (as Meristaulax) angulosa.  Brenner (1988, p.35) stated that the specimen designated as the lectotype by Sarjeant (1984a, p.102) cannot be a lectotype since it is not from the same sample as the holotype, citing Article 8 of the 1983 I.C.B.N. (Voss et al., 1983).  The current I.C.N. Article 9 iindicates that a lectotype must be part of the original material, which can include any specimens seen by the original author, whether or not cited in the original publication, and thus not necessarily from the same sample.  Hence, Sarjeant's lectotype cannot be invalidated for that reason.  However, Brenner also argued that the morphology of Sarjeant's lectotype differs sufficiently from that of the holotype to constitute a separate species.  Thus, Brenner proposed a new lectotype from the same sample as Klement's holotype and illustrated it (Brenner, 1988, pl.1, figs.3a–c); this specimen was not figured in Klement (1960).  I.C.N. Article 9.18 specifies that the choice of a lectotype by an author may be superseded if it can be shown to be in serious conflict with the protologue.  In contrast to Lentin and Williams (1993, p.2), Williams et al. (1998, p.148) followed Brenner (1988).  See also discussion under Meristaulax granulata (Klement).  Age: middle Oxfordian–early Kimmeridgian.

Parent: Cribroperidinium