Sars, G.O. (1905). Pacifische Plankton-Crustaceen. (Ergebnisse einer Reise nach dem Pacific. Schauinsland 1896—1897). II. Brackwasser-Crustaceen von den Chatham-Inseln. [Pacific plankton crustaceans. (Results of a voyage to the Pacific. Schauinsland 1896—1897). II. Brackish water crustaceans from the Chatham Islands.]. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Systematik. 21(4):371-414., available online athttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/87995[details]
Taxonomy Sars (1905a: 380) proposed the genus Amphiascus Sars, 1905a to include Dactylopus longirostris Claus, 1863, D. minutus...
Taxonomy Sars (1905a: 380) proposed the genus Amphiascus Sars, 1905a to include Dactylopus longirostris Claus, 1863, D. minutus Claus, 1863, D. debilis Giesbrecht, 1881 and a new species Amphiascus pacificus Sars, 1905a. Nicholls (1941b: 69) transferred D. minutus to Amphiascopsis Gurney, 1927 and D. debilis to Amphiascoides Nicholls, 1941b, and he designated D. longirostris as the type species of Amphiascus (on the ground of page precedence in Sars’s (1905a) publication). Lang (1944: 19), who was unaware of Nicholls’s (1941b) subsequent designation, unfortunately also fixed D. longirostris as type of Paramphiascopsis Lang, 1944. The latter therefore becomes a junior objective synonym of Amphiascus Sars, 1905 (ICZN Arts 61.3.3 and 67.11). Other workers have overlooked Nicholls’s type fixation and incorrectly treated D. minutus as the type species (e.g. Marinov & Apostolov 1988: 153). Accepting Nicholls’s (1941b) subsequent designation and Lang’s (1944, 1948) revision of Amphiascus would imply that only the species currently assigned to Paramphiascopsis should be included in Amphiascus. A new generic name is therefore required to receive all “orphaned” species that are currently included in Amphiascus sensu Lang (1944, 1948).
The only genus-group name that has been cited in the literature as a junior subjective synonym of, and potential substitute name for, Amphiascus sensu Lang (1944, 1948) is Mesamphiascus Nicholls, 1941b (Lang 1965: 253). This genus is probably one of the most unnatural ever established in the Miraciidae, to the extent that Nicholls (1941b: 79) himself admitted having difficulties in selecting a type species. His statement that “... perhaps parvus Sars (1906, p. 162, pl. ciii) is suitable, occupying a more or less central position in the genus, and having a fairly wide distribution” does not qualify for an explicit designation that is rigidly construed (ICZN Art. 67.5; see also Vervoort 1964: 191). Consequently, the genus-group name Mesamphiascus is unavailable and therefore cannot enter into the synonymy of Amphiascus. A new genus, Sarsamphiascus gen. nov., is proposed here to accommodate all species previously placed in Amphiascus by Lang (1948) and subsequent authors. Dactylopus minutus Claus, 1863 is formally fixed as the type species. The revised species compositions of Amphiascus and Sarsamphiascus gen. nov., including all new combinations, are given in Table 3. In order to satisfy the provisions of ICZN Art. 13.1 the new genus must be accompanied by (a) a description or definition that states in words characters that are purported to differentiate it, or (b) a bibliographic reference to such a published statement. Reference is made here to Lang’s (1948: 644) generic diagnosis of Amphiascus which is equivalent to the diagnosis of Sarsamphiascus gen. nov. [details]
Taxonomy Willen, E. 2002 moved all genera of Diosaccidae into Miraciidae
Taxonomy Willen, E. 2002 moved all genera of Diosaccidae into Miraciidae [details]
Walter, T.C.; Boxshall, G. (2021). World of Copepods Database. Amphiascus Sars G.O., 1905. Accessed through: Nozères, C., Kennedy, M.K. (Eds.) (2021) Canadian Register of Marine Species at: http://marinespecies.org/carms./aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=115305 on 2025-04-07
Nozères, C., Kennedy, M.K. (Eds.) (2025). Canadian Register of Marine Species. Amphiascus Sars G.O., 1905. Accessed at: https://www.marinespecies.org/Carms/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=115305 on 2025-04-07
original descriptionSars, G.O. (1905). Pacifische Plankton-Crustaceen. (Ergebnisse einer Reise nach dem Pacific. Schauinsland 1896—1897). II. Brackwasser-Crustaceen von den Chatham-Inseln. [Pacific plankton crustaceans. (Results of a voyage to the Pacific. Schauinsland 1896—1897). II. Brackish water crustaceans from the Chatham Islands.]. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Systematik. 21(4):371-414., available online athttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/87995[details]
basis of recordHuys, R. (2001). Copepoda - Harpacticoida. In: Costello, M.J. et al. (eds.) European register of marine species: a check-list of the marine species in Europe and a bibliography of guides to their identification. Collection Patrimoines Naturels. 50:268-280. (look up in IMIS) [details] Available for editors
additional sourceLang, K. (1965). Copepoda Harpacticoida from the Californian Pacific coast. Kungliga Svenska Vetensk-Akademiens Handlingar, Fjarde Serien. Almquist & Wiksell, Stockholm. 10(2):1-560, figs. 1-303, pls. 1-6. (look up in IMIS) [details] Available for editors
additional sourceWebber, W.R., G.D. Fenwick, J.M. Bradford-Grieve, S.G. Eagar, J.S. Buckeridge, G.C.B. Poore, E.W. Dawson, L. Watling, J.B. Jones, J.B.J. Wells, N.L. Bruce, S.T. Ahyong, K. Larsen, M.A. Chapman, J. Olesen, J.S. Ho, J.D. Green, R.J. Shiel, C.E.F. Rocha, A. Lörz, G.J. Bird & W.A. Charleston. (2010). Phylum Arthropoda Subphylum Crustacea: shrimps, crabs, lobsters, barnacles, slaters, and kin. in: Gordon, D.P. (Ed.) (2010). New Zealand inventory of biodiversity: 2. Kingdom Animalia: Chaetognatha, Ecdysozoa, Ichnofossils. pp. 98-232 (COPEPODS 21 pp.).[details] Available for editors
additional sourceHuys, R. (2009). Unresolved cases of type fixation, synonymy and homonymy in harpacticoid copepod nomenclature (Crustacea: Copepoda). Zootaxa. 2183:1-99., available online athttp://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2009/2/zt02183p099.pdf[details] Available for editors
additional sourceSars, G.O. (1905). Pacifische Plankton-Crustaceen. (Ergebnisse einer Reise nach dem Pacific. Schauinsland 1896—1897). II. Brackwasser-Crustaceen von den Chatham-Inseln. [Pacific plankton crustaceans. (Results of a voyage to the Pacific. Schauinsland 1896—1897). II. Brackish water crustaceans from the Chatham Islands.]. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Systematik. 21(4):371-414., available online athttps://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/87995 page(s): 380 [details]
additional sourceBodin, P. (1997). Catalogue of the new marine Harpacticoid Copepods. Studiedocumenten van het K.B.I.N. = Documents de Travail de l'I.R.Sc.N.B., 89. Koninklijk Belgisch Instituut voor Natuurwetenschappen: Brussels, Belgium. 89: 1-304. (look up in IMIS) page(s): 380 [details] Available for editors
additional sourceGriga, R.E. (1961). Harpacticoida raiona Sevastopolya. [Harpacticoids of the Sebastopol region.]. Trudy Sevastopol'skoy Biologicheskoy Stantsii, Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Transactions of the Sevastopol Biological Station). 14: 109-125. (Russian).[details] Available for editors
additional sourceNicholls, A.G. (1939). Marine harpacticoids and cyclopoids from the shores of the St. Lawrence. Le Naturaliste Canadien, Quebec. 66(2):241-316, 28 figs.[details] Available for editors
additional sourceNoodt, W. (1955). Marmara denizi Harpacticoiden (Crust. Cop.). Marine Harpacticoiden (Crust. Cop.) aus dem Marmare Meer. [Marine Harpacticoida (Crust. Cop.) from the Marmare Sea.]. Istanbul Universitesi Fen Fakultesi Mecmuasi. (B)20(1-2):49-94, figs. 1-103. (i/iv-1955).[details] Available for editors
additional sourceSars, G.O. (1906). Copepoda Harpacticoida. Parts XI & XII. Thalestridae (continued), Diosaccidae (part). An Account of the Crustacea of Norway, with short descriptions and figures of all the species. Bergen Museum. 5:133-156, pls. 81-96. (look up in IMIS) [details]
source of synonymyWillen, E. (2002). Notes on the systematic position of the Stenheliinae (Copepoda, Harpacticoida) within the Thalestridimorpha and description of two new species from Motupore Island, Papua New Guinea. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 43(1): 27-42.[details] Available for editors
Present Inaccurate Introduced: alien Containing type locality
Unreviewed
Belgium
From editor or global species database
Taxonomy Sars (1905a: 380) proposed the genus Amphiascus Sars, 1905a to include Dactylopus longirostris Claus, 1863, D. minutus Claus, 1863, D. debilis Giesbrecht, 1881 and a new species Amphiascus pacificus Sars, 1905a. Nicholls (1941b: 69) transferred D. minutus to Amphiascopsis Gurney, 1927 and D. debilis to Amphiascoides Nicholls, 1941b, and he designated D. longirostris as the type species of Amphiascus (on the ground of page precedence in Sars’s (1905a) publication). Lang (1944: 19), who was unaware of Nicholls’s (1941b) subsequent designation, unfortunately also fixed D. longirostris as type of Paramphiascopsis Lang, 1944. The latter therefore becomes a junior objective synonym of Amphiascus Sars, 1905 (ICZN Arts 61.3.3 and 67.11). Other workers have overlooked Nicholls’s type fixation and incorrectly treated D. minutus as the type species (e.g. Marinov & Apostolov 1988: 153). Accepting Nicholls’s (1941b) subsequent designation and Lang’s (1944, 1948) revision of Amphiascus would imply that only the species currently assigned to Paramphiascopsis should be included in Amphiascus. A new generic name is therefore required to receive all “orphaned” species that are currently included in Amphiascus sensu Lang (1944, 1948).
The only genus-group name that has been cited in the literature as a junior subjective synonym of, and potential substitute name for, Amphiascus sensu Lang (1944, 1948) is Mesamphiascus Nicholls, 1941b (Lang 1965: 253). This genus is probably one of the most unnatural ever established in the Miraciidae, to the extent that Nicholls (1941b: 79) himself admitted having difficulties in selecting a type species. His statement that “... perhaps parvus Sars (1906, p. 162, pl. ciii) is suitable, occupying a more or less central position in the genus, and having a fairly wide distribution” does not qualify for an explicit designation that is rigidly construed (ICZN Art. 67.5; see also Vervoort 1964: 191). Consequently, the genus-group name Mesamphiascus is unavailable and therefore cannot enter into the synonymy of Amphiascus. A new genus, Sarsamphiascus gen. nov., is proposed here to accommodate all species previously placed in Amphiascus by Lang (1948) and subsequent authors. Dactylopus minutus Claus, 1863 is formally fixed as the type species. The revised species compositions of Amphiascus and Sarsamphiascus gen. nov., including all new combinations, are given in Table 3. In order to satisfy the provisions of ICZN Art. 13.1 the new genus must be accompanied by (a) a description or definition that states in words characters that are purported to differentiate it, or (b) a bibliographic reference to such a published statement. Reference is made here to Lang’s (1948: 644) generic diagnosis of Amphiascus which is equivalent to the diagnosis of Sarsamphiascus gen. nov. [details] Taxonomy Willen, E. 2002 moved all genera of Diosaccidae into Miraciidae [details]
Present 
