Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T19:02:24.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Identification and Validity of Certain Species of Ascidians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

N. J. Berrill
N. J. Berrill
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology, University of Leeds.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There has existed in the past, and still does exist, considerable confusion both in the question of a satisfactory basis for the classification of ascidians and that of the validity of many species.

The principal orders and families are fairly stereotyped, and confusion and divergent opinion is mainly confined to the internal classification of the various families. These differences have a twofold origin, in that classifications have been constructed by various authors on three distinct bases, and that it is very difficult to distinguish between structures which are similar through relationship and those which are similar through convergent or parallel development. Further difficulty arises from the fact that authors describing a new species with a view to fitting it into one particular classification, have often given insufficient details for its accurate inclusion in another scheme. There is also divergent opinion as to the correct nomenclature that should be employed, but with that this paper is not concerned.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , February 1928 , pp. 159 - 175
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1928

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE

Alder, and Hancock, . 1905–1912. The British Tunicata. Ray Society.Google Scholar
Forbes, and Hanley, . 1848. British Molluscs. (Tunicata.) London.Google Scholar
Grave, C. 1926. Molgula citrina Ald. Hanc. Journ. Morphology, vol. 45.Google Scholar
Hartmeyer, R. 1909–1911. Tunicata. Bronn's Tier Reich., vol. 3, suppl.Google Scholar
Hartmeyer, R. 1923–1924. Ascidiacea. Danish Ingolf Expedition.Google Scholar
Heller, . 1877. Untersuchungen über die Tunicaten des Adriatischen und Mittelmeeres. III (1): Denk. Ak. Mien. 37.Google Scholar
Huitfeld-Kaas, H. 1889. Synascidæ. Norske Nordhavs. Exped., vol. 7.Google Scholar
Huntsman, A. G. 1912. Ascidians from the coast of Canada. Trans. Inst. Canad., vol. 9.Google Scholar
Huntsman, A. G. 1915. The development of protostigmata in Ascidians. Proc. Roy. Soc., vol. 86, B.Google Scholar
Huntsman, A. G. 1922. The Ascidian family Molgulidæ. Roy. Soc. Canada, vol. 16.Google Scholar
Kupffer, C. 1872. Zur entwickelung der einfachen Asciden. Arch, mikr. Anat., vol. 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kupffer, C. 1875. Tunicata. Ber. Komm. D. Meere, vol. 2. Berlin.Google Scholar
Lacaze-Duthiers, H. de. 1874. Les ascidies simples des côtes de France. Arch. Zool. expt. ser. I, vol. 3.Google Scholar
Lacaze-Duthiers, H. de. 1877. Pt. 2. Arch. Zool. expt., vol. 6.Google Scholar
Lacaze-Duthiers, and Delage, Y. 1892. Faune de Cynthiadées. Mem. pres. Ac. France, vol. 45.Google Scholar
Lahille, . 1890. Recherches Tunicates. Toulouse.Google Scholar
Lucas, A. M. 1927. The validity of Molgula robusta Van Name as a species distinct from M. manhattensis de Kay. Occ. papers Bost. Nat. Hist. Soc., vol. 5.Google Scholar
Müller, O. F. 1776. Zoologica Danica Prodromus. Havniæ.Google Scholar
Selys-Longchamps, M. De. 1917. Sur le bourgeonnement des Polystyelines Stolonica et Heterocarpa. Bull. Sci. Fran. Belg., vol. 50.Google Scholar
Van Name, W. G. 1912. Simple ascidians of the coast of New England. Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. 34.Google Scholar