Scheldt species source details
Fitzhugh, Kirk; Mortimer, Kate; Brasil, Ana C. dos Santos. (2024). The monophyly of Magelona F. Müller, 1858 (Polychaeta, Magelonidae): Comments on Meißner et al.'s (2023) reinstatement of Octomagelona Aguirrezabalaga, Ceberio & Fiege, 2001. Zootaxa. 5497(4): 496-504.
491055
10.11646/zootaxa.5497.4.2 [view]
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:4DE3828C-7168-4228-95DA-DAED36973215 [view]
Fitzhugh, Kirk; Mortimer, Kate; Brasil, Ana C. dos Santos
2024
The monophyly of <em>Magelona</em> F. Müller, 1858 (Polychaeta, Magelonidae): Comments on Meißner <em>et al</em>.'s (2023) reinstatement of <em>Octomagelona</em> Aguirrezabalaga, Ceberio & Fiege, 2001
Zootaxa
5497(4): 496-504
Publication
Annelidabase. Open access at Zootaxa
Available for editors 
The first published phylogenetic hypotheses involving members of the polychaete taxon Magelonidae Cunningham & Ramage, 1888, were reported by Mortimer et al. (2021), wherein results showed that for the two genera in the family, Magelona F. Müller, 1858, was paraphyletic relative to Octomagelona Aguirrezabalaga, Ceberio & Fiege, 2001. The only option to formally name at least some of the resultant phylogenetic hypotheses was to place Octomagelona into synonymy with Magelona, leaving the definition of Magelonidae redundant with that of a monophyletic Magelona. Meißner et al. (2023) subsequently described specimens as members of new species, Octomagelona borowskii Fiege, Knebelsberger & Meißner, 2023, and O. sp. cf. O. borowskii, with the view that Octomagelona should be maintained as distinct from Magelona. We present reasons why reestablishing the paraphyly of Magelona is scientifically unwarranted.
Systematics, Taxonomy
Date
action
by
Magelona F. Müller, 1858 (status source)