Stelloria

Orbigny, 1849, p. 9

Type Species

Stelloria elegans d'Orbigny, 1850; Subsequent Designation Wells, 1936, p. 130

Type Specimen: Lectotype; MNHN MNHN.F.M03501; Verified; Dry Preserved

Type Locality: Cenomanian of France (Le Mans, Sarthe).

(=Anthophyllum sulcatum Michelin, 1846). Wells (1936, p. 130) designated the (geno-) lectotype, referring to the specimen #6703 of the d'Orbigny collection, which he said was labeled as "Coelosmilia sulcata". Apparently, Wells (1936, p. 130) considered Stelloria elegans d'Orbigny, 1850, and Coelosmilia sulcata (Michelin) in d'Orbigny (1850) as one and the same. Furthermore, and more importantly, he considered the specimen #6703 as an original syntype of Stelloria elegans.

Diagnosis

Solitary, turbinate, fixed. Costosepta compact, with strong vertical striations or carinae projecting halfway to adjacent septa or fusing with them. Costae reduced. Columella and pali absent. Endothecal dissepiments sparse.

Remarks

Recently, a paper was published by Loeser (2014d) on the genera Stelloria and Coelosmilia. In this paper, numerous erroneous statements are made:...... 1) according to Loeser, the genus Coelosmilia was established twice: once by d'Orbigny, 1850, and again by Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851........ This statement is incorrect as the genus Coelosmilia was established by Milne Edwards and Haime in 1850, p. XXV (not 1851; see, e.g., Biodiversity Heritage Library for publication date), whereas d'Orbigny (1850, p.181) only assigned the species Anthophyllum sulcatum Michelin, 1846, to Milne Edwards and Haimes genus (d'Orbigny clearly refers to Milne Edwards and Haime as the authors of Coelosmilia). Therefore, the statement by Loeser (2014d, p. 130) that Anthophyllum sulcatum Michelin, 1846, is the type species of Coelosmilia is incorrect. The designation of the type species of the genus Coelosmilia was carried out by Milne Edwards and Haime (1850, p. XXV), clearly naming the taxon Parasmilia porculum as the type species of their genus. ...... 2) """the taxon created by Milne Edwards and Haime, 1851, represents a nomen dubium because the locality of the type species is unknown and the type specimen is not available.""" ...... This statement is incorrect as the status of a nomen dubium is defined by the lack of an adequate taxonomic characterization ("a name of unknown or doubtful application") but is dependent neither on designation of a type locality nor on the availability of type material. Therefore, statements such as “Coelosmilia MILNE EDWARDS and HAIME, 1851 is a nomen dubium. Stelloria ORBIGNY, 1849 is a nomen dubium, but it may be confused with Coelosmilia ORBIGNY, 1850 and could be a senior synonym of this genus.” (Loeser, 2014d, p. 131) are beyond comprehension. ..... 3) """the genus Stelloria d'Orbigny, 1849, is a nomen dubium.""" ..... This statement is incorrect. While it remains unclear on which facts this statement is based, it is assumed that Loeser (2014d, p. 131) based his assumption on the study of the specimen MNHN A26585 (=# 6707, original number) of the d'Orbigny collection, which may or may not correspond to the genus concept of Stelloria. However, Wells (1936, p. 130) clearly based the genus concept on the specimen # 6703 of the d'Orbigny collection which, according to Wells, is identical to the taxon Anthophyllum sulcatum Michelin (1846, p. 197, pl. 50. figs. 5a-c). Therefore, the genus Stelloria can be clearly taxonomically identified and is not a nomen dubium, regardless of whether or not the type material is available.

Distribution

• Western Europe; Early Cretaceous
• Central Europe; Late Cretaceous
• South Asia; Late Cretaceous

This page has been in preparation since 02-Jun-2007 12:36

This version was contributed by Rosemarie Baron-Szabo on 11-Sep-2016 11:06.

Page authors are: Rosemarie Baron-Szabo. Please contact the editor if you would like to contribute to the diagnosis of this taxon.

The editor is: Rosemarie Baron-Szabo