Huasha Cheng, 1986

Noble, Paula, Aitchison, Jonathan C., Danelian, Taniel, Dumitrica, Paulian, Maletz, Jörg, Suzuki, Noritoshi, Cuvelier, Jessie, Caridroit, Martial & O’Dogherty, Luis, 2017, Taxonomy of Paleozoic radiolarian genera, Geodiversitas 39 (3), pp. 419-502 : 421

Huasha Cheng, 1986

Huasha Cheng, 1986: 71 .

TYPE SPECIES. — Huasha holdsworthi Cheng, 1986 ( Cheng 1986: 73, pl. 2, fig. 1, 10, 14, pl. 3, fig. 7).

AGE AND LOCATION OF TYPE MATERIAL. — Upper Devonian and Lower Carboniferous, Oklahoma and Arkansas, United States.

TAXON CODE. — 002.

STATUS. — Junior synonym of Lapidopiscum (by Won 1998: 230).

DIAGNOSIS. — “Test with closed triangular skeletal frame of intersector, a-, and b- rods. Four extra-triangular extensions developed only: i.d., i. v., b. d. and b. v. Perforate lamellar shell covering posterior a. t. and dorsal part of i. t. with large, circular basal aperture. Free, fully developed caveal ribs, three to six or more pairs in number, restricted to anterior portion of a.t.; C1 pair always rejoining the plane of proximal end of b. v. Strongly developed patagium surrounded the ventral side of the skeletal frame.” ( Cheng 1986: 71).

REMARKS

Huasha is considered a junior synonym to Lapidopiscum Deflandre 1958 . Huasha was originally distinguished from Lapidopiscum by having a perforate lamellar shell rather than an imperforate one, by having well developed i. v. and b.v. extra-triangular extensions, and a longer shell ( Won 1998). The difference in lamellar shell structure is a function of preservation and perception of the original authors. Examination of Lapidopiscum from the type material shows that there is no difference in the structure of the lamellar wall. Differences in the length of the extra-triangular extensions and of the shell as a whole are considered a species level distinction and does not warrant the designation of a new genus.