Eupolymnia Verrill, 1900

Londoño-Mesa, Mario H., 2009, Terebellidae (Polychaeta: Terebellida) from the Grand Caribbean region 2320, Zootaxa 2320 (1), pp. 1-93 : 26-27

Eupolymnia Verrill, 1900

Verrill, 1900:660 (syn.).— Hessle, 1917:174, Text-Fig. 41 (as Polymnia ).— Hartmann-Schröder, 1996:509.— Capa & Hutchings, 2006:4.

Synonyms: Amphitritoides Costa, 1862 nomen oblitum; Pallonia Costa, 1862 nomen oblitum; Polymnia Malmgren, 1867 (preoccupied by a bird genus).

Type species: Amphitrite nesidensis delle Chiaje, 1828, by subsequent designation.

Diagnosis: Branchiae on segments 2–4; eyespots sometimes present; lateral lappets on segments 2–3 or 2–4; ventral shields from segment 2; nephridial papillae from segment 2 or 3, continuous or discontinuous, along 3–9 segments; 17 pairs of notopodia from segment 4, notochaeta smooth, bilimbate; neuropodia from segment 5, uncini avicular in single rows on segments 5–9 or 10; in double rows, arranged face to face, until segment 20; thereafter in single rows.

Remarks: The name Eupolymnia Verrill, 1900 , is considered nomen protectum and the names Amphitritoides Costa, 1862 and Pallonia Costa, 1862 are considered nomen oblitum, according to the ICZN (1999), articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2. Holthe (1986b) recognized 18 species, but a recent study of species and diagnostic characters by Capa and Hutchings (2006) reported 20 species, of which only E. crassicornis ( Schmarda, 1861) , from Bermuda, has been described from the Grand Caribbean region. Terebella turgidula Ehlers, 1887 , from Florida, has been synonymized with E. crassicornis , ( Augener, 1925; Hartman, 1938; Rullier, 1974; Holthe, 1986b). Nevertheless, the number of pairs of notopodia and the shape of chaeta and uncini are different in both species, which suggests T. turgidula does not belong to Eupolymnia . On the other hand, Treadwell (1924) mentioned that Terebella magnifica Webster, 1884 , from Bermuda, belongs to Eupolymnia as defined by Verrill (1900). Hence, E. magnifica ( Webster, 1884) is listed by Perkins and Savage (1975) and by Salazar- Vallejo (1996) for the Grand Caribbean region, according to previous reports. Type material of E. magnifica has been compared with non-type material of E. nebulosa ( Montagu, 1818) but from the type locality ( England), and it was found that both species differ mainly in the shape of uncini along the body. Thus, a revision of the genus is needed to clarify the distribution of some species and the relationships between them. E. rullieri sp. nov., is described from Mexican Caribbean . Consequently, the genus is represented in the region by three species described.