FranzBernhard Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 Hello! I have added an Andara diluvii today and I have seen on fossilworks.org, that this species was/is also considered to belong to the genera Arca (original designation), Scapharca and Diluvarca. Nothing unusal, it is often the case, that one species was attributed to various genera since its discovery. Just out of curiosity, I would like to ask, if anybody knows which is "the species with the most genera"? Thanks! Franz Bernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 Am gambling on a member of the Ostreidae For the record: we are talking about Yours is "Badenian",I take it? You are using SOMETHING by e.g. Mandic or Harzhauser as source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediospirifer Posted July 9, 2018 Share Posted July 9, 2018 The species that I know of the most genera for is Cinncinnetina meeki. It has in the past been attributed to Dalmanella, Onniella, Orthis, and Resserella. So that's five, to date... Anyone have one with a longer list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echinoid Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Yes! Got one that has 6 Port Jackson Shark - Heterodontus portjacksoni (official one these days) Squalus portjacksoni Cestracion heterodontus Cestracion cainzoicus Squalus philippi Heterodontus philippi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted July 10, 2018 Author Share Posted July 10, 2018 Thanks for the response! Echinoid, these are only 3 genera... doushantuo, fossils from the locality Fuggaberg were checked by M. Harzhauser and O. Mandic. Yes, its Badenian, ca. 15 Ma old. Franz Bernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 with regard to Mediospirifer's response or: j.1475-4983.2011.01113.x.pdf 3,1 Mb and what a nifty piece,but ,given the authors & the source,no surprise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediospirifer Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 54 minutes ago, doushantuo said: with regard to Mediospirifer's response Interesting! I'll have to read that when I have more time; it's rather late right now. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted July 10, 2018 Author Share Posted July 10, 2018 OMG, I have one with 8 9 (!) genera in my own collection, totally forgot it: Venus clam Cordiopsis islandicoides (Lamarck, 1818). Also attributed to Cyprina (original designation), Venus (original designation), Pelecyora, Pitar(ia), Amiantis, Meretrix, Sinodia, Cytherea. Franz Bernhard Venus clam Cordiopsis islandicoides (Lamarck, 1818). Oisnitz-SE-3, St. Josef, Styria, Austria. "Florianer Schichten" of the Styrian basin. Miocene, Badenian, ca. 15 Ma). Width of specimen ca. 47 mm, Collected 2. April 2017, Nr. 3213. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doushantuo Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Awesome,Franz! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediospirifer Posted July 10, 2018 Share Posted July 10, 2018 Franz, that's pretty impressive. I suspect that most (all?) species with such genera reassignment lists have a few things in common: -- Discovered several decades or more than a century ago -- Lots of lookalikes -- Not the first in any but their most recent genus assignment found (because the type specimen for a new genus will not be reassigned later) C. meeki certainly fits all of this; it was first described in 1875, looks like a lot of other orthid brachiopods, and isn't type for any genus, including Cincinnetina. Your clam certainly fits the first two; unfortunately, Fossilworks doesn't list the type species for most of the genera on your list so I can't confirm the third. Cool subject! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FranzBernhard Posted July 11, 2018 Author Share Posted July 11, 2018 Thanks, Mediospirifer! But I got it wrong, there are 9 genera for this species (I have to addd Cyprina), and I got the original designation wrong, too... See excerpt from Hoernes, 1870. And also an excerpt from Sieber, 1955. It seems that this was and is always a total mess... So many lookalikes. Franz Bernhard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.