Petrosia testudinaria var. fistulophora Wilson, 1925

Van Soest, Rob W. M., 2024, Correcting sponge names: nomenclatural update of lower taxa level Porifera, Zootaxa 5398 (1), pp. 1-122 : 39

Petrosia testudinaria var. fistulophora Wilson, 1925

( Figs. 4 D-G)

Petrosia testudinaria var. fistulophora Wilson, 1925: 401 , pl. 40 fig. 5, pl. 41 figs. 1–2, pl. 48 fig. 8.

The variety was described by Wilson from Lannang Point, Eastern Philippines, Albatross Stat. 5249, 7.1017°N 125.6889°E, depth 42 m (syntype USNM 21285). The typical variety originally described by Lamarck (1814 as Alcyonium , holotype originally in MNHN but currently missing), with neotype BMNH 1881.10.21.266 collected by the ‘Alert’ at Cape Denison, on the Central and Southern Great Barrier Reef, 20°S 148.2667°E. These are typical ‘barrel sponges’, with the differences found in the outer surface, with ‘fistules’ in the present variety which are not readily visible in most Central Indo-Pacific barrel sponges. The spicules reported by Wilson are similar in size and shape to those given for X. testudinaria by various authors. Swierts et al. 2017 investigated genetic properties of barrel sponges ( X. muta and X. testudinaria ) from Central West Atlantic and Indo-West Pacific localities and discovered that there are a large number of reproductively isolated ‘species’ hiding under these names. However, these species were only characterized genetically by Swierts et al. and no attempts were made to connect genetic and morphological properties, rendering the recognition of the species impractical. This means that there is currently no method to establish the validity of the present variety as one of the many reproductively isolated taxa. Surface characters of barrel sponges like X. testudinaria are notoriously variable, and I do not believe Wilson’s descriptions are sufficiently clear to consider the variety as a taxon distinct from X. testudinaria . I propose for the time being to merge the variety with the typical variety as Xestospongia testudinaria ( Lamarck, 1814) , but the name fistulophora may return as valid in future research.

Figures

FIGURE 4. A–B. Haliclona digitata Tanita & Hoshino, 1989, A. habitus pl. 15 fig. 5, B. skeleton text–fig. 97, C. Isodictya simulans var. incrustans Carter, 1887: pl. 6 fig. 2, D–G. Petrosia testudinaria var. fistulophora Wilson, 1925, D–F. habitus pl. 40 fig. 5, pl. 41 figs. 1–2, G. spicules pl. 48 fig. 8, H. Petrosia truncata var. aruensis Hentschel, 1912: pl. XXI fig. 51, I. Protoschmidtia foraminosa f. aurantiaca Czerniavsky, 1880: pl. I (V) figs. 6–7, J. Reniera informis var. taurica Czerniavsky, 1880: pl. I (V) fig. 5a, K. Reniera palmata var. taurica Czerniavsky, 1880: pl. I (V) figs. 1, L. Toxochalina multiformis Pulitzer- Finali, 1986: fig. 84.