Difference between revisions of "Polysphaeridium majus"

From dinoflaj3
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 14: Line 14:
 
|?Category:Type#<nowiki>*</nowiki>,  
 
|?Category:Type#<nowiki>*</nowiki>,  
 
|?Category:TypeCorrectName#<nowiki>+</nowiki>,  
 
|?Category:TypeCorrectName#<nowiki>+</nowiki>,  
|limit=200
+
|limit=400
 
|format=template | template=SpeciesListNoQuest  
 
|format=template | template=SpeciesListNoQuest  
 
|?Category:Quoted#",'''
 
|?Category:Quoted#",'''
 
|Outro=</div>}}
 
|Outro=</div>}}

Revision as of 17:15, 4 December 2016

"?majus" (Lejeune-Carpentier, 1940, p.B220-B221; text-fig.13) Davey and Williams, 1969, p.6.  Emendation: Lejeune-Carpentier and Sarjeant, 1981, p.12, as Amphorosphaeridium majus.  Holotype: Lejeune-Carpentier, 1940, text-fig.13; Streel et al., 1977, pl.1, fig.7; Lejeune-Carpentier and Sarjeant, 1981, pl.2, figs.6-7; text-fig.7.  NOW Exochosphaeridium.  Originally Hystrichosphaeridium, subsequently Polysphaeridium?, thirdly Cordosphaeridium, fourthly Dapsilidinium? (combination not validly published), fifthly Amphorosphaeridium, sixthly (and now) Exochosphaeridium.  Questionable assignment: Davey and Williams (1969, p.6).  Taxonomic junior synonyms: Baltisphaeridium (as Exochosphaeridium) bifidum and Exochosphaeridium bifidum var. involutum (as Exochosphaeridium bifidum subsp. involutum), both according to Peyrot (2011, p.284).  This combination, as a questionable assignment, was not validly published in Davey and Williams (1966b, p.95), since these authors did not fully reference the basionym.  Age: Late Cretaceous.

Parent: Polysphaeridium