![](images/blank.gif) |
![](images/MarBEF.gif) |
MarBEF Data System |
![](images/eu.gif) |
|
|
|
WoRMS taxon details
original description
(of Cladophora montagnei var. waianeana Brand, 1904) Brand, F. (1904). Über die Anheftung der Cladophoraceen und über verschiedene polynesische Formen dieser Familie. <em>Beihefte zum Botanischen Centralblatt.</em> 18(Abt. 1): 165-193. [details]
context source (Bermuda)
Schneider, C. W. (2003). An annotated checklist and bibliography of the marine macroalgae of the Bermuda Islands. Nova Hedwigia, 76(3-4): 275-361 [details]
basis of record
Guiry, M.D. & Guiry, G.M. (2024). AlgaeBase. <em>World-wide electronic publication, National University of Ireland, Galway.</em> searched on YYYY-MM-DD., available online at http://www.algaebase.org [details]
From editor or global species database
Taxonomic remark "On the basis of the study of the type of Conferva catenata Linnaeus, Hoek (1969: 134) concluded that the species belonged to Cladophora, but erroneously thinking that Kützing (1843: 271) had made a new combination based on Conferva catenata Linnaeus. Therefore, Hoek (1969: 134) cited the species as Cladophora catenata (Linnaeus) Kützing. Kützing (op. cit.) however, actually cited Conferva catenata C. Agardh (1824: 119) and not Conferva catenata Linnaeus (1753: 1166). C. Agardh (1824: 119), when publishing Conferva catenata, included Conferva catenata Linnaeus followed by a question mark. However, according to Art. 52.2, Note 1 and Ex. 13 of ICN (Melbourne Code, McNeill et al., 2012), the inclusion of a name with an expression of doubt such as a question mark, does not make Conferva catenata C. Agardh nomenclaturally superfluous. Therefore, both Conferva catenata Linnaeus and Conferva catenata are validly published (Art. 6.2 of ICN). Nevertheless, Conferva catenata is a later homonym of Conferva catenata Linnaeus and thus illegitimate (Art. 53.1 of ICN). Consequently, because the name Cladophora catenata Kützing (1843: 271) is based on the illegitimate Conferva catenata C. Agardh, it should be treated as a replacement name according to Art. 58 of ICN (nomen novum, see entry in INA, 2014) and should be attributed only to Kützing." (Cormaci, Furnari & Alongi 2014: 327-8). - (22 Jul 2015) [details]
|
|
|
|
![](images/blank.gif) |