No Name, No Game

In an interesting contribution Joppa et al. (2011) revisit some aspects of the taxonomic impediment (Evenhuis 2007; http://www.cbd.int/gti/) and come to the conclusion that, contrary to the generally accepted idea, both the rates of species description and the number of taxonomists have increased exponentially since the 1950’s. Joppa et al. (2011) also note a marked decline in the number of species described per taxonomist which they attribute to the difficulty of finding new species in an ever declining ‘missing species pool’. Therefore, their results might be interpreted that today’s taxonomic workforce is sufficient to describe the remaining (shallow) ‘pool of missing species’. In this contribution, we question if this is indeed the case and propose a solution for speeding up taxonomic descriptions

The sea cucumber Holothuria lineata Ludwig, 1875 (Holothuroidea, Aspidochirotida, Holothuriidae) re-described from the newly found type

A re-description of the little-known holothurian species Holothuria (Lessonothuria) lineata Ludwig, 1875 is given. It is based on the single recovered type specimen and an individual recently collected on Glorioso Islands, near Madagascar. A key to separate three closely related and commonly confused species, i.e., Holothuria (Lessonothuria) pardalis Selenka, 1867, Holothuria (Lessenothuria) verrucosa Selenka, 1867 and Holothuria (Lessonothuria) insignis Ludwig, 1875, is presented

Four notable additions to the South African echinoid fauna (Echinodermata, Echinoidea)

Although a comprehensive guide to the South African echinoid fauna was published as recently as 2017, four notable additions to the fauna have emerged since that time and are reported on here. The first South African records for Histocidaris purpurata (Thomson, 1872), Echinothrix diadema (Linnaeus, 1758), Microcyphus rousseaui L. Agassiz, in Agassiz and Desor 1846, and Pseudoboletia maculata Troschel, 1869 are presented. All four species have previously been recorded from the Atlantic and/or Indian Oceans and their ranges are thus extended southwards here. These additions increase the total number of echinoid species known from South Africa to 74

The littoral sea cucumbers (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) of Guam re-assessed – a diversity curve that still does not asymptote

The Micronesian island of Guam has been an important site for the study of littoral tropical holothurian taxonomy for almost 200 years. Despite substantial attention by both expeditions and resident taxonomists, new records are still regularly added to the fauna, demonstrating the challenge of documenting even such large and well-known animals in a small hyper-diverse area. Guam is the type locality of species described by Quoy & Gaimard (1833) and Brandt (1835). A survey of the sea cucumber fauna by Rowe & Doty (1977) led to one of the most used guides for the identification of tropical Pacific sea cucumbers because of the color illustrations of living animals it presented. Focus on echinoderms including holothurians continued with numerous new records added in the following decades. Paulay (2003a) summarized the fauna last, recording 46-47 species. At this stage the fauna was thought to be well documented. A week-long workshop on holothurian systematics sponsored by the National Science Foundation PEET (Partnerships for Enhancing Expertise in Taxonomy) project in 2010 included a substantial field work component, sampling both during the day and night, with snorkeling and SCUBA, across a variety of habitats. This survey yielded 40 species, including numerous new records and even species. Further sampling by Kerr’s lab since the workshop has added additional records. The littoral holothuroid fauna of Guam now comprises 65 species in 17 genera and 7 families. Half of the 19 newly recorded species are the result of unravelling cryptic species in complexes, the other half are based on new collections. Eleven species are known from single specimens, suggesting that much still remains to be learned about the fauna

Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016

Molpadia africana Ludwig & Heding 1935

<i>Molpadia africana</i> (Ludwig & Heding, 1935) <p> (Fig. 30 A <b>–</b> C)</p> <p> <i>Trochostoma africanum</i> Ludwig & Heding, 1935: 142, textfig. 10.</p> <p> <b>Material examined. IE-2007-756</b> (2 specimens sampled in Mahajamba Bay); <b>IE-2007-781</b> (1 specimen, sampled in front of Mahajamba Bay)</p> <p> <b>Remarks</b>. This specimen fits remarkably well with the only know previous record of this species approximately 10° to the north in the Zanzibar Channel.</p>Published as part of <i>Samyn, Yves & Vandenspiegel, Didier, 2016, Sublittoral and bathyal sea cucumbers (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) from the Northern Mozambique Channel with description of six new species, pp. 451-497 in Zootaxa 4196 (4)</i> on page 490, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4196.4.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/168273">http://zenodo.org/record/168273</a&gt

Kareniella gracilis Heding 1940

<i>Kareniella gracilis</i> Heding, 1940 <p> (Fig. 18 A <b>–</b> C)</p> <p> <i>Kareniella gracilis</i> Heding, 1940: 349, textfig. 14; Cherbonnier & Féral, 1981: 381, fig.15 A <b>–</b> J. <i>Bathyplotes punctatus</i> (Sluiter, 1901): Rowe, 1989: 282.</p> <p> <b>Material examined</b>. <i>Non-type material</i>: <b>IE-2007-803</b> (1 specimen, collected between Nosy Bé and Band du Leven)</p> <p> <b>Remarks</b>. Heding (1940) erected <i>Kareniella</i> for synallactids that are distinctly flattened, have four-pillared tables and have non-retractile tube feet in the median ventral radial area (fig. 14A <b>–</b> C). Rowe (1989: 282) considered <i>K. gracilis</i> to be the junior synonym of <i>Bathyherpystikes punctatus</i> Sluiter, 1901. We do not agree with this decision as the presence of well-developed medio-ventral tube feet clearly makes <i>K. gracilis</i> a distinctive species to be classified in its own genus. Such was also the conclusion of Cherbonnier & Féral (1981) who had examined some of the type material of <i>K. gracilis</i>.</p> <p> We however do agree with Rowe (1989) in classifying <i>Bathyherpystikes punctatus</i> in the genus <i>Bathyplotes.</i></p> <p>The present record is the first for the Indian Ocean.</p>Published as part of <i>Samyn, Yves & Vandenspiegel, Didier, 2016, Sublittoral and bathyal sea cucumbers (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) from the Northern Mozambique Channel with description of six new species, pp. 451-497 in Zootaxa 4196 (4)</i> on pages 477-478, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4196.4.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/168273">http://zenodo.org/record/168273</a&gt

Mesothuria parva Theel 1886

<i>Mesothuria parva</i> (Théel, 1886) <p> (Fig. 13 A <b>–</b> B)</p> <p> <i>Holothuria murrayi</i> var. <i>parva</i> Théel, 1886: 186, pl. 9, fig. 2, pl 16, figs 4 & 5 <i>Mesothuria parva</i>; Cherbonnier & Féral, 1981 (records); Thandar 1992: 161, figs 1 & 6A <i>Mesothuria deani</i> Mitsikuri, 1912: 40 <b>–</b> 42, textfig. 9</p> <p> <b>Material examined</b>. <i>Non-type material</i>: <b>IE-2007-813</b> (3 specimens, sampled in front of Nazendry Bay); <b>IE-2007- 775</b> (3 specimens, collected in front of Nazendry Bay)</p> <p> <b>Remarks</b>. This well-known species is a new record for Madagascar. The closest previous record is from Sodwana Bay in South Africa (Thandar, 1992).</p>Published as part of <i>Samyn, Yves & Vandenspiegel, Didier, 2016, Sublittoral and bathyal sea cucumbers (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) from the Northern Mozambique Channel with description of six new species, pp. 451-497 in Zootaxa 4196 (4)</i> on page 471, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4196.4.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/168273">http://zenodo.org/record/168273</a&gt

Molpadia lenticulum Cherbonnier & Feral 1981, new comb.

<i>Molpadia lenticulum</i> (Cherbonnier & Féral, 1981) new comb. <p> (Fig. 32 A <b>–</b> B)</p> <p> <i>Trochostoma lenticulum</i> Cherbonnier & Féral, 1981: 405, fig.29 <b>Material examined. IE-2007-778(1)</b> (1 specimen sampled in front of Majumga)</p> <p> <b>Remarks</b>. Pawson (1965, 1967, 1977) lumped <i>Trochostoma</i> (and eight other genera) with <i>Molpadia</i>. As long as no complete revision of the group is carried out, we follow this decision. The holotype and paratype of this species were sampled at 750 m depth in the Philippines. The present record is thus a significant horizontal and vertical (950 m depth) range extension.</p>Published as part of <i>Samyn, Yves & Vandenspiegel, Didier, 2016, Sublittoral and bathyal sea cucumbers (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) from the Northern Mozambique Channel with description of six new species, pp. 451-497 in Zootaxa 4196 (4)</i> on pages 490-491, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4196.4.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/168273">http://zenodo.org/record/168273</a&gt