Quinqueloculina d’Orbigny 1826

Schönfeld, Joachim & Lübbers, Julia, 2020, Checklist, assemblage composition, and biogeographic assessment of Recent benthic foraminifera (Protista, Rhizaria) from São Vincente, Cape Verdes, Zootaxa 4731 (2), pp. 151-192 : 156

Genus Quinqueloculina d’Orbigny 1826

Quinqueloculina auberiana d’Orbigny 1839b, p. 193 , pl. 12, figs. 1–3 [Plate 1, Fig. 8]. Cimerman & Langer (1991), p. 36, pl. 32, figs. 8, 9. Milker & Schmiedl (2012), p. 56, figs. 15.1, 2. Hanagata & Nobuhara (2015), p. 21, figs. 8.7–8.8.

Quinqueloculina bosciana d’Orbigny 1839b, p. 191 , pl. 11, figs. 22–24 [Plate 1, Figs. 4, 5]. Van Hengstum & Scott (2011), p. 224, fig. 12.16. Milker & Schmidl (2012), p. 56, fig. 15.7–9. Weinmann & Goldstein (2016), fig. 3D. Note: This species is very similar to Quinqueloculina laevigata and may also be mistaken with Quinqueloculina oblonga . Earlier chambers of Quinqueloculina bosciana are oblique to the longitudinal axis of the test. The top of the last chamber forms a low collar around the aperture.

Quinqueloculina disparilis d’Orbigny 1826, p. 302 , no. 21 [Plate 1, Fig. 14, 15]. Cimerman & Langer (1991), p. 36, pl. 33, figs. 1–4. Milker & Schmiedl (2012), p. 56, figs. 15.10–12. Non ” Adelosina disparilis ” Sanchez (2010) , p. 156, pl. 2, fig. 4.

Quinqueloculina eburnea (d’Orbigny) = Triloculina eburnea d’Orbigny 1839b, p. 180 , pl. 10, figs 21–23 [Plate 2, Fig. 9]. Thissen (2015), p. 46, pl. 7, figs. 1–3. ” Pseudolachnalella eburnea ” Chen & Lin (2017), fig. 2.3. ” Affinetrina eburnea ” Poignant (2019) , pl. 2, figs. 11–12.

Quinqueloculina laevigata d’Orbigny 1826, p. 143 , pl. 3, figs. 31–33 [Plate 1, Figs. 9–12]. Carvalho & Chermont (1952), p. 82, pl. 1, figs. 3a–c. Cimerman & Langer (1991), p. 37, pl. 33, figs. 8–11. Milker & Schmiedl (2012), p. 58, figs. 15.13–15. “ Pseudotriloculina laevigata ” Yokes et al. (2014) , figs. 8.8a, b. “? Adelosina laevigata ” Laut et al. (2017) , p. 137, pl. 1, fig. M. Note: this species is more slender than Quinqueloculina seminulum and the outline is rounded triangular.

Quinqueloculina lamarckiana d’Orbigny 1839b, p. 189 , pl. 11, figs. 14, 15 [Plate 1, Fig. 7]. Bock (1971), p. 19, pl. 6, figs. 7–9. Jones (1994), p. 21, pl. 5, fig. 12. Javaux & Scott (2003), p. 20, figs. 4.12, 4.13.

Quinqueloculina lata Terquem 1876, p. 82 , pl. 11, fig. 8a–c [Plate 1, Fig. 16]. Le Campion (1968), p. 247, pl. 22, figs. 3a–c. non Sanchez (2010), p. 157, pl. 2, fig. 6. Milker & Schmiedl (2012), p. 58, fig. 15.16.

Quinqueloculina parvula Schlumberger 1894, p. 255 , pl. 3, figs. 8–9 [Plate 1, Figs. 17–18]. Cimerman & Langer (1991), p. 37, pl. 34, figs. 6–8. Milker & Schmidl (2012), p. 59, figs. 15.25–27. Frontalini et al. (2015), fig. 5a, b. Note: the rough surface, inflated chambers, and a rim borderung the aperture are distinctive characters of this species.

Quinqueloculina seminulum (Linné) = Serpula seminula Linné 1758, p. 786 [Plate 1, Fig. 13, Plate 5, Fig. 12]. Jones (1994), p. 21, pl. 5, fig. 6. Reymond et al. (2014), pl. 1, figs. 17, 18. “ Quinqueloculina seminula ” Raposo et al. (2016) , p. 11, fig. 3.b. Laut et al. (2017), p. 137, pl. 5, fig. I. Note: this species shows a large morphological variety as noted by Haake (1980: p. 8). The tests are always elongated-ovate in lateral view and subrounded-triangular in peripheral view.

Quinqueloculina stelligera Schlumberger 1893, p. 68 , pl. 2, figs. 58, 59 [Plate 1, Fig. 6, Plate 5, Fig. 11]. Cimerman & Langer (1991), p. 38, pl. 34, figs. 13–15. Mendes et al. (2012), p. 38, figs. 2.5a–c. Milker & Schmiedl (2012), p. 59, figs. 16.1–4. Note: the elongated O-shaped outline in lateral view and acute costae on the peripheral chamber margins are diagnostic features of this species.