identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
D34C87B84D342628FF44FD5F6699FA1F.text	D34C87B84D342628FF44FD5F6699FA1F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis Kinberg 1867	<div><p>Piromis Kinberg, 1867 emended</p><p>Piromis Kinberg 1867:338, Grube 1877a:65, 68, Day 1967:663, Fauchald 1977:117.</p><p>Balanochaeta Chamberlin, 1919:397 (Type species: Trophonia eruca Claparède, 1868, by original designation). Type species: Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867, by monotypy.</p><p>Diagnosis. Body cylindrical. Tunic thick, usually with adherent sediment grains. Cephalic cage well developed. Anterior margin of chaetiger 1 papillated, middorsal trifid lobe present or absent. First few chaetigers with long parapodial papillae, or papillae formed into dorsal longitudinal rows; these individual papillae sometimes hypertrophied into dorsal tubercles. Neuropodia with multiarticulate bidentate neurochaetae in median and posterior chaetigers. Branchiae cirriform, arising from tongue-like plate.</p><p>Remarks. Fauchald (1977:117) stated that Piromis contains 10 species, provided with a tongue-shaped branchial plate that might be entire or bifid, and having unidentate or bidentate neurohooks. However, Day (1973:108) had previously redefined Piromis to retain only those species provided with bidentate neurohooks, and regarded those species with entire neurohooks as members of Pherusa . Since Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867, the type species for the genus, has bidentate, multiarticulated neurohooks (Hartman 1949:117, P. 15, Fig. 7), and a tongue-like branchial plate (Day, 1967:664, Fig. 32.4c), these should be the defining characters for the genus.</p><p>As herein defined, besides the type species, Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867, Piromis includes P. amoureuxi n. sp., P. brisegnoi n. sp., P. capulata (Moore, 1909) n. comb., P. e r u c a (Claparède, 1868), P. kisemboanus (Augener, 1918) n. comb., P. robertsi (Hartman, 1951), P. suni n. sp., P. vossae n. sp., P. w e b s t e r i Day, 1973 n. comb., n. status, and P. w e h e i n. sp.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D342628FF44FD5F6699FA1F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D342629FF44F9896292FD25.text	D34C87B84D342629FF44F9896292FD25.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis Kinberg 1867	<div><p>Key to species of Piromis Kinberg, 1867, emended</p><p>1 Tunic with abundant sand grains; individual papillae inconspicuous............................................. 2</p><p>- Tunic with few sediment grains, body wall mostly uncovered.................................................. 12</p><p>2(1) Sediment grains completely covering the body, partially immersed in the tunic, giving a rough surface, at least over anterior chaetigers............................................................................................ 3</p><p>- Sediment grains concentrated on dorsal and lateral surfaces, very few or none ventrally; neurohooks with distal article mostly unidentate, posterior neurochaetae with distal piece as long as 1/3–1/2 of total chaetal length...................................................................................... P. kisemboanus (Augener, 1918) n. comb., (partim)</p><p>3(2) Anterior chaetigers with notopodial lobes, sometimes eroded or reduced......................................... 4</p><p>- Anterior chaetigers without notopodial lobes............................................................... 9</p><p>4(3) Anterior chaetigers with dorsal tubercles.................................................. P. w e b s te r i Day, 1973</p><p>- Anterior chaetigers without dorsal tubercles................................................................. 5</p><p>5(4) Neuropodial hooks start in chaetiger 4 or 5 (markedly shorter than those present in preceding chaetigers)................ 6</p><p>- Neuropodial hooks start in chaetiger 6.................................................................... 7</p><p>6(5) Median and posterior chaetigers with neurospines with few long articles, distal article longest, entire.................................................................................................. P. e r u c a (Claparède, 1869)</p><p>- Median and posterior chaetigers with neurospines with many medium-sized articles, continued almost to the tip. P. s u n i n. sp.</p><p>7(5) Most sediment particles adhered through its widest area....................................................... 8</p><p>- Most sediment particles adhered through its narrowest area (look loosely adhered to the tunic); notopodia 2–8 rough, not form- ing conical lobes........................................................................... P. wehei n. sp.</p><p>8(7) Larger notopodial papillae about 1/4–1/5 as long as notochaetae; neurochaetal terminal article medially widened, bidentate.................................................................................. P. arenosus Kinberg, 1867</p><p>- Larger notopodial papillae about 1/2–1/3 as long as notochaetae; neurochaetal terminal articles cylindrical, tapering, mostly unidentate................................................... P. kisemboanus (Augener, 1918) n. comb. (partim)</p><p>9(3) Anterior chaetigers with fine sediment grains, often with dorsal tubercles............ P. capulata (Moore, 1909) n. comb.</p><p>- Anterior chaetigers with larger sediment grains, without dorsal lobes............................................ 10</p><p>10(9) First chaetiger with one pair of ventrolateral tubercles.................................... P. robertsi (Hartman, 1951)</p><p>- First chaetiger without ventrolateral tubercles............................................................. 11</p><p>11(10) Neuropodial hooks from median chaetigers with articles twice as long as wide throughout most of its length................................................................................................. Piromis fauchaldi n. sp.</p><p>- Neuropodial hooks from median chaetigers with articles barely longer than wide........................ P. vossae n. sp.</p><p>12(1) Median notopodia with about ten chaetae per bundle, as thick as, or slightly thicker than neurochaetae; neurohooks with distal article falcate, tapering................................................................... P. brisegnoi n. sp.</p><p>- Median notopodia with 6–7 chaetae per bundle, about as thick as neurochaetae; neurohooks with distal article straight, of about the same width..................................................................... Piromis amoureuxi n. sp.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D342629FF44F9896292FD25	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D352627FF44FCEE66F9FADE.text	D34C87B84D352627FF44FCEE66F9FADE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis arenosus Kinberg 1867	<div><p>Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867</p><p>Figure 1</p><p>Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867:338; Kinberg, 1910:68, Pl. 26, Fig. 3 A–G (redescr.); Hartman, 1949:117, Pl. 15, Figs. 7–9; Hartman, 1961:122, Pl. 27, Figs. a–c; Day, 1961:509 Fig. 8 e; Hartman, 1966:44, Pl. 1, Figs. 10–13; Day, 1967:664 Figs. 32.4a–d.</p><p>Trophonia capensis McIntosh, 1885:363 –364, Pl. 44, Figs. 7–9, Pl. 33a, Figs. 1–3; McIntosh, 1904:52 –53.</p><p>Type material. Southern Africa. Syntypes of Piromis arenosus (SMNH-502, another tag in the same vial NHRM- 803), Port Natal, South Africa, Wahlberg coll. Holotype of Trophonia capensis (BMNH-85.12.1.260), mature female, damaged, Sea Point, near Cape Town, South Africa, intertidally, Dec. 1873.</p><p>Additional materials. Two specimens (LACM-AHF-2506), rocky shore, The Haven Hotel, Transkei coast, Eastern Cape, South Africa, 2 Dec. 1938, J.H. Day coll. (notopodial papillae as long as 1/5 chaetal length). A mature female broken in two pieces (LACM-AHF -2507), rocky shore, Sea Point, Cape Town, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, 12 Feb. 1938, J.H. Day coll. A thin specimen (LACM-AHF-2508) without data, University of Cape Town Ecological Survey, Sta. CH 3J, 8 Jan. 1940.</p><p>Description. Syntypes apparently fixed in alcohol, damaged, smaller one almost broken into two pieces (employed for redescription, body with more consistency), larger syntype softer, in three pieces (Fig. 1 A). Body clavate, slightly tapering posteriorly, regenerating in anterior and posterior ends; tunic papillated, with small sediment particles mostly embedded in tunic (Fig. 1 B, C). Papillae arranged in longitudinal rows, barely exposed dorsally, four papillae per segment, more exposed ventrally (six papillae per segment). Complete syntype 54 mm long, 6.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 6 mm long, 75 chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic hood not exposed in syntypes (not dissected to avoid further damage); short, margin smooth in smaller specimen. Anterior end not studied in syntypes; tongue-shaped branchial lobe exposed, branchiae lost. A non-type specimen (LACM-AHF -5210) already dissected; prostomium elevated cone with median black longitudinal band; two large red eyes present (dark brown in holotype). Caruncle well developed, running to tip of branchial plate; median keel pale, lateral ridges black (Fig. 1 D). Palps long, thick; palp keels rounded, elevated, dark (pale in holotype). Lateral lips well-developed; ventral and dorsal lips well-developed, punctuated with black spots (pale, eroded in holotype). Branchiae cirriform, arising from tongue-like plate, arranged in two lateral groups, each group with branchiae arranged in about 26 oblique rows, basal rows with more branchiae, each group with about 100 filaments. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae mostly damaged, 1/9 as long as whole body, or slightly shorter than body width. Chaetigers 1–3 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, dorsolateral in chaetiger 1, lateral in chaetigers 2–3; 6–8 chaetae per fascicle. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with a large middorsal black scar. Anterior chaetigers with short papillae, mostly eroded, about 1/7 as long as notochaetae; chaetigers 2–8 with elevated smooth lobe formed by long postchaetal papilla. Chaetigers 1–3 of about same length (difficult to determine, because of regeneration in larger syntype). Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; compound bidentate neurohooks from chaetiger 6. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia well developed, forming large dorsal lobes in chaetigers 1–8. Parapodia lateral, median neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia with long chaetal lobes and short digitate papillae; both with three small prechaetal and three larger postchaetal papillae (seen in smaller specimen).</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in transverse row, 6–8 per bundle, as long as 1/2 –1/3 body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with short articles basally and medially; slightly longer distally, with hooked tips (Fig. 1 E). Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–5; multiarticulated bidentate hooks from chaetiger 6, arranged in transverse row (Fig. 1 F), hooks in posterior chaetigers arranged in J-shaped pattern, with six chaetae in anterior and median chaetigers, up to 7–9 posterior chaetigers (Fig. 1 G). Anterior neurohooks slightly tapered, gently curved distally; posterior neurohooks with distal article medially swollen, more markedly curved distally, accessory tooth often eroded.</p><p>Posterior end conical; pygidium with anus terminal, without cirri (Fig. 1 C).</p><p>Variation. The holotype of Trophonia capensis has most chaetae broken, most papillae eroded, and the anterior end exposed; it was previously dissected middorsally along almost entire length of body. Holotype 60 mm long, 4 mm wide, cephalic cage 3 mm long, 81 chaetigers; oocytes 120 µm.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867 includes Trophonia capensis McIntosh, 1885, both described from the same region in Southern Africa. Kinberg (1910), and Hartman (1949) illustrated the typical hooked tip with a smaller accessory tooth, but Hartman (1961) illustrated an almost straight hook with a hooded tip, with the hood almost completely covering the fang. Those figures may be based on a different species. Most neurohooks in syntypes and additional specimens have lost the accessory tooth or hood, although some show a low hump. The only exception is a small, 3.5 mm wide specimen (LACM-AHF), that has the anterior end exposed, and has most neurohooks with the accessory tooth still in place. Perhaps the lack of an accessory tooth in most specimens would explain why Hartman identified the specimens as Semiodera capensis, but this stems from confusion about Semiodera . The species belonging in this genus lack a thick tunic, have a cephalic shield and short anchylosed neurohooks; those species having a thick tunic, lacking a dorsal shield and anchylosed neurohooks should be transferred to Trophoniella Caullery, 1944 .</p><p>On the other hand, the middorsal trifid lobe is confirmed in the smaller specimen; it has a basal thickening that carries three marginal lobes, all directed anteriorly on the same plane. The marginal lobes are bifid, with the junction area darker. This complete structure, the trifid lobe, feature is fragile and often breaks off from the specimens leaving a scar. The dorsal notopodial lobes are more developed on chaetigers 1–6. Further, the size-related features are the notopodial lobes, which become more prominent in more posterior chaetigers in larger specimens, and the number of neurohooks.</p><p>Monro (1933) and Day (1955) both regarded S. kinsemboanus Augener, 1918 as a junior synonym of Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867 . However, some specimens from Western Africa have the same long notopodial papillae and neurochaetae that Augener described from his only specimen. These are relevant differences and therefore they are regarded as separate species (see below).</p><p>One of the intertidal South African specimens (LACM-AHF-5229) has very large sediment particles and a very different appearance from the type materials. The neurohooks are arranged in a J-shaped pattern from chaetiger 11, while they are in such a pattern from chaetiger 9 in the typical P. arenosus specimens. It is included here with hesitation pending some better preserved specimens.</p><p>Piromis arenosus is closely allied with P. kisemobanus (Augener, 1918) n. comb., n. spell., a tropical Western African species, since both species have sediment grains mostly embedded in the tunic. They differ because P. arenosus has relatively shorter notopodial papillae (about 1/4–1/5 as long as notochaetae) while they are longer in P. kisemboanus (about 1/2–1/3 as long as notochaetae), and the distal article in neurohooks is medially widened and bidentate in P. arenosus, while they are cylindrical, tapering, mostly unidentate in P. kisemboanus .</p><p>Distribution. Originally described from Natal, Southern Africa, the species may be restricted to temperate waters around Southern Africa.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D352627FF44FCEE66F9FADE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D3B2625FF44FAFC65C9FB3B.text	D34C87B84D3B2625FF44FAFC65C9FB3B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis amoureuxi	<div><p>Piromis amoureuxi n. sp.</p><p>Figure 2</p><p>Piromis cf. roberti Amoureux, 1985:104, Fig. 4.</p><p>Type material. Caribbean Sea. Holotype (MNHN-900) and five paratypes (MNHN-900a) damaged, most sediment cover removed and many chaetae broken by screening or excessive brushing, Manche à l’eau Lagoon (16°16ʹ0 0ʺ N, 61°33ʹ0 0ʺ W), Guadeloupe Island, Nov. 1980.</p><p>Additional material. Caribbean Sea. Eight specimens (MNHN-914), seven anterior and one posterior fragments, preserved in alcohol, stained with Rose Bengal, Guadeloupe Island, without details about the collecting site or date. One specimen (ECOSUR-2/2001), Semarnat Pier, Cancun, Quintana Roo, Mexico, in purple sponge growing on sea-wall, 1 m, 18 Feb. 2001, P. Salazar coll.</p><p>Description. Holotype (MNHN-900) complete, pinkish due to overstaining with Rose Bengal, anteroventrally dissected, several parapodia removed (Fig. 2 A). Body smooth with few sediment particles (Fig. 2 B, C), possibly due to abrasion during sieving process; paratypes with large sediment particles on dorsal surface. Tunic thick, covering most body papillae; exposed papillae arranged in longitudinal rows, two dorsal and four ventral. Holotype 25.5 mm long, 2.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 3 mm long, 80 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end previously dissected in holotype, now lost (details based upon a paratype). Cephalic hood short, margin finely papillose. Prostomium low, pale, rounded, with dark brown eyes. Caruncle pale, well developed, extending to tip of branchial plate (Fig. 2 D). Palps invaginated into mouth, contracted, distorting lips. Branchiae cirriform, arising from a short tongue-like protuberance, arranged in two lateral groups, each with branchiae arranged in about 11 oblique rows, basal ones longer, with more filaments, each group with about 80 filaments. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae about 1/8 as long as body length, or slightly longer than body width. Chaetigers 1–3 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, dorsolateral in chaetiger 1, lateral in chaetigers 2–3; chaetiger 1 with 6–7 noto- and 3–4 neurochaetae per side, chaetigers 2–3 with 4–5 chaetae per fascicle. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with a multifid lobe, better preserved in non-type specimens, with 2–3 distal and two lateral projections. Anterior chaetigers with long papillae, chaetigers 2–6 with an elevated notopodial lobe. Chaetigers 1–3 progressively longer. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; shorter multiarticulated bidentate neurohooks from chaetigers 6–7. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia poorly developed, low rounded dorsal lobes in anterior chaetigers (2–6), reduced posteriorly. Parapodia lateral, median neuropodial ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia with long postchaetal capitate papillae; notopodia with 3–4, longest about 1/3–2/5 as long as notochaetae (Fig. 2 E); neuropodia with three papillae.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in a transverse ∪-shaped row, 6–7 per bundle, about as long as 1/3 body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, articles short basally, longer medially and distally (Fig. 2 F), tips tapering. Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–5; shorter multiarticulated bidentate neurohooks from chaetigers 6–7, arranged in a transverse row in anterior, median and posterior chaetigers (Fig. 2 G); far posterior chaetigers with neurohooks in an oblique row (Fig. 2 H), 4–5 per bundle throughout the body. Each neurohook with long articles basally, progressively decreasing in size; distal piece about as long as 1/5–1/6 neurohook length. Tip hooked, bidentate; accessory tooth not passing the fang.</p><p>Posterior end tapering, conical; pygidium contracted, anus ventral, without anal cirri.</p><p>Etymology. This species is named for Louis Amoureux, in recognition of his many studies on polychaetes, including some on Western Atlantic Ocean specimens, including the ones employed for this description.</p><p>Type locality. Manche à l’eau Lagoon, Guadeloupe Island, Lesser Antilles.</p><p>Variation. The paratypes are four anterior and one posterior fragments; the anterior fragments are 13–21 mm long, 0.8–2.8 mm wide, cephalic cage 2–3 mm long, 30–40 chaetigers.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis amoureuxi n. sp. is closely allied with P. brisegnoi n. sp. from the Gulf of California because both species have very few sediment grains along the body. They differ in the relative number and size of notochaetae, and in the shape of the distal article of neurohooks. Thus, in P. amoureuxi n. sp. the median notopodia have fewer (6–7) and shorter chaetae (about 1/3 as long as body width) than P. brisegnoi n. sp., which has more (about 10) and longer notochaetae (about 1/2 as long as body width). Further, the distal neurochaetal article in P. amoureuxi is straight, of about the same width throughout it, while in P. brisegnoi they are falcate and tapering.</p><p>Distribution. From the Northwestern Caribbean region to the Lesser Antilles, in shallow water fine sediments or in sediment pockets in some intertidal sponges.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D3B2625FF44FAFC65C9FB3B	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D392623FF44FA9F6262FE26.text	D34C87B84D392623FF44FA9F6262FE26.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis brisegnoi	<div><p>Piromis brisegnoi n. sp.</p><p>Figure 3</p><p>Type material. Eastern Pacific Ocean, Gulf of California. Holotype (LACM-AHF -2509), Puerto Refugio (29°33ʹ30ʺ N, 113°32ʹ58ʺ W), Isla Angel de la Guarda, Baja California, 2 Apr. 1940, E.F. Ricketts coll. Two paratypes (ECOSUR, MNHN), Playa Las Moradas, Bahia de Los Angeles, Baja California, rocky intertidal, under rocks, 25 May 1986, SISV coll.</p><p>Additional material. Eastern Pacific Ocean, Gulf of California. One specimen (ECOSUR-8/1987), Playa El Caimancito, Bahia de La Paz, Baja California Sur, under stones, 1.5 m depth, 6 Aug. 1987, SISV, coll. (anterior end exposed).</p><p>Description. Holotype (LACM-AHF-2509) complete; body pale, chaetae long, abundant, with few sediment particles (Fig. 3 A); anterior region bent over on ventral side; tunic heavily papillose (Fig. 3 B). Papillae not arranged in longitudinal rows, irregularly distributed. Holotype 27 mm long, 4 mm wide, cephalic cage 5.5 mm long, 48 chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic hood not exposed. Upon dissection, prostomium short, with dark pigment in a laterally fading median longitudinal band; anterior eyes black, posterior ones brown. Caruncle well developed, extending to tip of branchial plate (Fig. 3 C), median keel pale, lateral ridges black. Palps contracted; palp keels rounded, elevated, black. Lips distorted by dissection, finely spotted. Branchiae cirriform, arising on tongue-like protuberance, in two lateral groups, each with branchiae arranged in about 30 oblique rows, basal ones with more filaments, each group with about 100 filaments. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae about 1/5 as long as body length, slightly longer than body width. Chaetigers 1–3 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, dorsolateral in chaetiger 1, lateral in chaetigers 2–3; chaetiger 1 with ten notochaetae per bundle, six thicker, four thinner; parapodia 2–3 with six thick notochaetae, six neurochaetae per bundle.</p><p>Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with multifid lobe, projected ventrally. Anterior chaetigers with long papillae, chaetigers 2–8 with elevated notopodial lobe. Chaetigers 1–3 of the same length. Chaetal transition from anterior cephalic cage segments to body segments abrupt with multiarticulate bidentate neurohooks from chaetiger 6. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia well developed, dorsal lobes in anterior chaetigers (1–8). Parapodia lateral, median neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia with long chaetal lobes and long digitate papillae; both with 4–5 smaller prechaetal and 4–5 larger postchaetal papillae.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in transverse ∪-shaped row, with 9–10 chaetae per bundle, each notochaeta half as long as body width, as thick as, or thicker than, neurochaetae; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with short articles basally and medially, markedly longer distally (Fig. 3 D), tips entire. Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–5; multiarticulated bidentate hooks from chaetiger 6, arranged in transverse row in chaetigers 1–11, from chaetiger 12 in a J-shaped pattern with 8–9 neurohooks in anterior and median chaetigers (Fig. 3 E), increasing to 12 in posterior chaetigers (Fig. 3 F). Each neurohook with short articles basally, then fewer articles, becoming progressively shorter, with very long distal article. Tips of neurohooks curved, bidentate, accessory tooth not longer than the fang.</p><p>Posterior end conical; pygidium contracted, anus terminal, without anal cirri.</p><p>Etymology. This species is named after my Invertebrate Zoology teacher, Carlos H. Briseño, in recognition of his encouraging lectures and lab sessions, and his unexpected inspirational effect by telling me that studying polychaetes was a very difficult task that I should avoid, and to thank him for his confidence and support by providing lab space and equipment during my early academic career. The last name root has been modified for euphonic purposes.</p><p>Type locality. Puerto Refugio, Baja California, Gulf of California.</p><p>Variation. Paratypes 32–45 mm long, 5.0 mm wide, cephalic cage 6.0– 6.5 mm long, 42–49 chaetigers.</p><p>Remarks. Because of the relative scarcity of sediment particles on the body, Piromis brisegnoi n. sp. is closely allied with P. amoureuxi n. sp., a Caribbean Sea species. The two species differ especially in chaetal features: P. brisegnoi n. sp. has longer notochaetae (about 1/2 as long vs 1/3 as long as body width), and more abundant notochaetae (about 10 vs 6–7 per bundle); the distal neurochaetal article in P. brisegnoi n. sp. is falcate and tapering, while it is straight and of about the same width in P. amoureuxi n. sp.</p><p>Distribution. Western coast of the Gulf of California, in intertidal to shallow water, mixed rocky bottoms.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D392623FF44FA9F6262FE26	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D3F2621FF44FDEE63D3FECE.text	D34C87B84D3F2621FF44FDEE63D3FECE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis capulata (Moore 1909) Moore 1909	<div><p>Piromis capulata (Moore, 1909) n. comb.</p><p>Figure 4</p><p>Trophonia capulata Moore, 1909a:284 –286, Pl. 9, Figs. 60–61; Stasek, 1966:12; Loi, 1980:138.</p><p>Pherusa capulata: Hartman, 1969:295 –296, Figs. 1–2; Fauchald, 1972:414; Blake, 2000:1314, Fig. 1.5. Piromis roberti: Spies, 1975:188, 191, 192, Pl. 3, Fig. 5 (non Hartman, 1951).</p><p>Piromis capulata: Spies, 1975:188, 191, 192, Pl. 4, Figs. 12–13, Pl. 5, Figs. 15–16; Pl. 7, Figs. 23, 25, 26 (informal n. comb.).</p><p>Type material. Eastern Pacific Ocean. Holotype (CAS-19721) collected in San Diego Bay, San Diego, California, intertidal, Dec. 1902, E.C. Starks, coll.</p><p>Additional material. Eastern Pacific Ocean. Two anterior fragments (LACM-AHF-2510), R/V Velero III, Sta. 1030 (27°39ʹ0 5ʺ N, 114°54ʹ47ʺ W to 27°39ʹ12ʺ N, 114°54ʹ12ʺ W), off Turtle Bay, Baja California, México, 26–31 fathoms, gray sand, mud, 18 Jan. 1940 (dorsal tubercles in chaetigers 2–6). One specimen (ECOSUR-7/ 1987), complete, Punta Las Rosas, Todos Santos Bay, Ensenada, Baja California, in eelgrass ( Phyllospadix scouleri Hooker) root masses, low intertidal, 30 Jul. 1987, SISV, coll. (anterior end exposed, pale). One specimen (ECO- SUR-12/1981), complete, Bahia San Quintín, Baja California, 4 Dec. 1981., L.E. Calderon, coll. Five specimens (ECOSUR-15/1985), Laguna Ojo de Liebre, Baja California Sur, in Catarina scallops ( Argopecten circularis (Sowerby)) bottoms, 15 Apr. 1985, E. Baqueiro, coll. Five specimens (USNM [unnumbered]), dried out, Catalina Harbor &amp; Monterey (sic), 26-32-45C, 1874, H.H. Dall, coll. Fifteen anterior fragments (USNM 40484), off Balboa, San Diego, California, Nov. 1932, G.E. McGinitie, coll. (paired dorsal lobes in chaetigers 2–8; size-dependent).</p><p>Description. Holotype (CAS-19721) complete, some parapodia previously removed, anterior end ventrally dissected; body cylindrical, long, tapering posteriorly (Fig. 4 A); tunic papillated, with small sediment particles adhered over most of the body, especially dorsally, posterior region without sediment. Long capitate papillae arranged in longitudinal rows, two dorsally, four ventrally, over the first 5–6 chaetigers, forming low, eroded dorsal tubercles in the holotype (Fig. 4 B, C); better preserved in other specimens (Fig. 4 D), from chaetiger 2. Holotype 111 mm long, 4.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 9 mm long, 134 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end not exposed, hardly seen through the dissection cut; features based on a non-type specimen (ECOSUR). Prostomium dark, elevated; eyes large, black. Caruncle well developed, separating branchial filaments into two lateral groups (Fig. 4 E); median keel pale, lateral ridges pale, with two black longitudinal bands. Palps large, corrugated; palp bases darker than surrounding areas. Dorsal and lateral lips thin, slightly darker than surrounding areas; ventral lip reduced. Branchiae cirriform, arising on a tongue-like protuberance, separated in two lateral groups, each group with filaments arranged in transversal rows, each row with 6–8 filaments, with about 50 filaments per group. Longest branchial filaments about as half as long as palps. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae less than 1/20 body length, or twice as long as body width. Chaetigers 1–3 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, dorsolateral in chaetiger 1, lateral in chaetigers 2–3. Chaetiger 1 with 10 notochaetae and 8 neurochaetae, chaetigers 2–3 with 8 notochaetae and 6 neurochaetae per bundle. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with a median trifid lobe projected anteriorly (damaged). Anterior chaetigers with long papillae forming anteriorly directed, elongate conical lobes. Chaetigers 1–3 of similar length. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to segmental chaetae abrupt; bidentate compound neurohooks from chaetiger 4, shorter from chaetiger 6. Gonopodial lobes present in chaetigers 5–6, larger in the former (Fig. 4 F).</p><p>Parapodia poorly developed, except for few anterior ones (1–9); chaetae emerging from body wall. Parapodia lateral, median neuropodia ventrolateral. Notopodia better developed in chaetigers 1–9, with long postchaetal papillae making elongate conical lobes, decreasing posteriorly. Median noto- and neuropodia with two short, capitate papillae and four postchaetal longer ones.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in short transverse row, 7–8 per bundle, 1/3 as long as body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with articles short basally, becoming long medially, then slightly shorter distally (Fig. 4 G). Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–3; long bidentate compound neurohooks in chaetigers 4–5 becoming shorter in chaetiger 6, arranged in a J-shape with eight per neuropodium (Fig. 4 H), neurochaetae becoming thinner, longer in posterior chaetigers.</p><p>Posterior region almost with few sediment particles; pygidium conical, anus dorsoterminal, without cirri.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis capulata (Moore, 1909) n. comb. resembles P. robertsi (Hartman, 1951) from the Gulf of Mexico, and P. fauchaldi n. sp. from the Gulf of California, since all have notopodial lobes. They differ because in P. capulata there are dorsal tubercles in addition to the notopodial lobes, and there are only fine sediment particles on the tunic while the other two species lack dorsal tubercles and their tunics include larger sediment grains.</p><p>Further, there might be some confused records for the Northeastern Pacific Ocean. The records of P. ro b e r t i or P. capulata by Spies (1975), and of P. eruca by Hobson &amp; Banse (1981), are possibly conspecific and might belong to an undescribed species, which has large dorsal lappets over several anterior chaetigers. Further, the records by Hartman (1969) and Blake (2000) of Pherusa capulata suggest that their materials had four pairs of branchiae and bifid neurohooks, which would not fit the specific features of P. capulata . On the other hand, the informal new combination that was introduced by Spies (1975:189, ff) was adequate and it is herein confirmed.</p><p>Distribution. From San Diego, California to Ojo de Liebre (Scammon’s) lagoon in Baja California, in intertidal and shallow sandy bottoms. The records of Piromis eruca for the western border between the United States and Canada (Hobson &amp; Banse 1981:59, Fig. 11 j–l) differ by having series of two foliose dorsal lobes instead of only the bare tip of larger papillae. They do not belong to the Mediterranean species, and might be an undescribed species. The same might apply to the record by Blake (2000:13), since his specimen was collected in 91 m depth, and there is no indication of the posterior neurohooks, which separate Piromis from Trophoniella .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D3F2621FF44FDEE63D3FECE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D3D263FFF44FEC66317FD56.text	D34C87B84D3D263FFF44FEC66317FD56.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis eruca (Claparède 1868) Claparede 1868	<div><p>Piromis eruca (Claparède, 1868)</p><p>Figure 5</p><p>Trophonia eruca Claparède, 1868:105 –107, Pl. 25, Fig. 2 A–C; Lo Bianco, 1893:43 –44. Stylarioides eruca: Fauvel, 1927:119, Figs. 42h–l (syn.; partim).</p><p>Piromis eruca: Day, 1973:108 –109 (redescr.); Castelli, 1990:14.</p><p>Type material. Mediterranean Sea. Neotype (MNHN-507), and paraneotype (MNHN-507a), Naples, 1910; no further data.</p><p>Additional material. Mediterranean Sea. Three specimens (MNHN-185) without data, collection of de Saint-Joseph-20 (two with the anterior end exposed; about 50 branchial filaments per side; anterior margin of chaetiger 1 with a foliose, wide anterior lobe; chaetigers 2–4 with tubercles around dorsal papillae). One specimen (MNHN-457), Naples, no further data, S. Lo Bianco coll. (complete specimen, anterior end exposed; about 50 branchial filaments per lateral group). Two specimens (MNHN-507) damaged, most with chaetae broken, one complete, anterior end exposed, some parts broken off, Naples, 1910, without further data.</p><p>Description. Neotype complete (Fig. 5 A); body tapering posteriorly, pale brown, sediment particles abundant, loosely packed, leaving body wall partially uncovered (Fig. 5 B, C); anterior region slightly bent over its ventral side; tunic papillated. Large capitate papillae arranged in longitudinal rows, two rows dorsally, four rows ventrally; body 43 mm long, 3 mm wide, cephalic cage 5 mm long, 80 chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic hood exposed in neoparatype, margin smooth; anterior end dissected in neoparatype. Prostomium short, pale; eyes dark, faded. Caruncle well-developed, extending to tip of branchial plate, median keel pale, lateral ridges pale (Fig. 5 D). Palps corrugated; palp keels rounded, elevated, pale. Dorsal lip short; lateral lips thicker, ventral lip reduced. Branchiae cirriform, arising on tongue-like protuberance, in two lateral groups (completely separated in a non-type specimen, Fig. 5 E), each with branchiae arranged in 4–5 concentric rows, or about 12 oblique rows, basal ones with more branchiae, each group with about 40 filaments. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae about 1/8 as long as body length, twice as long as body width. Chaetigers 1–4 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, dorsolateral in chaetiger 1, lateral in chaetigers 2–4; chaetiger 1 with 5–6 noto-, 5–6 neurochaetae per bundle, chaetigers 2–4 with 7–8 noto- and 5–6 neurochaetae per bundle. Anterior dorsal margin of first chaetiger with a trifid lobe. Anterior chaetigers with long papillae, chaetigers 2–6 with notopodial lobes. Chaetigers 1–3 of about the same length. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; shorter multiarticulate bidentate neurohooks from chaetiger 5. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia well developed, rounded dorsal lobes in anterior chaetigers (1–6). Parapodia lateral, median neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia with long chaetal lobes and long digitate papillae; notopodia with two, rarely three smaller papillae, neuropodia with three larger prechaetal papillae, both with three larger postchaetal ones.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in a short transverse row, eight per bundle, slightly less than half as long as body width, thinner than neurochaetae; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, each with short articles basally, medium-sized medially, longer distally (Fig. 5 F), tip hooked. Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–4; multiarticulated bidentate hooks from chaetiger 5, arranged in a transverse row in all chaetigers; six neurohooks in anterior and median chaetigers (Fig. 5 G), up to five in posterior chaetigers (Fig. 5 H). Each neurohook with short articles basally, then few articles becoming progressively longer, then decreasing in size towards distal article (6–10 times longer than wide). Tips hooked, bidentate; accessory tooth flat, wide, as long as the fang.</p><p>Posterior end blunt, rounded; pygidium contracted, anus dorso-terminal, without anal cirri.</p><p>Variation: Paraneotype complete, mature female; sediment grains large, more abundant dorsally; with two longitudinal rows of papillae dorsally, four ventrally. Paraneotype 25.5 mm long, 3 mm wide, cephalic cage 4.5 mm long, 73 chaetigers; chaetigers 1–6 with projecting, acute, conical lobes, decreasing posteriorly, in following chaetigers very reduced. Most notopodia with two pre- and three postchaetal papillae, each long, capitate, in posterior chaetigers there can be up to 4 additional ones under the neurochaetal lobe. Anterior end slightly exposed. Neurochaetae of chaetigers 1–4 long; shorter in chaetiger 4, smaller thereafter; oocytes about 100 µm.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis eruca (Claparède, 1868) resembles P. s u n i n. sp. from the Western Pacific Ocean because both have large sediment particles on the tunic, notopodial lobes in anterior chaetigers, and neurohooks from chaetigers 4–5. They are so similar that some records from Japan and other Western Pacific localities have been referred to the Mediterranean species. They differ, however, in the relative size of neurochaetal articles from median and posterior chaetigers, because there are few, longer articles in P. e r uc a, while there are many medium-sized articles in P. suni n. sp.</p><p>Piromis eruca (Claparède, 1868) was redescribed by Day (1973). Records from areas beyond the Mediterranean Sea or other distant regions are questionable and belong to another species (see below). The British Columbia specimen, judging by the illustrations (Hobson &amp; Banse 1981:59, Fig. 11 k, l), apparently belongs in Trophoniella . On the other hand, the original description indicated about 24 branchial filaments; however, Fauvel (1927:119) stated that there could be either 8–10, or 50–60. The paraneotype is from Naples, the type locality, and has about 40 branchial filaments, and another specimen from the same place has about 50 filaments. Because of the supposed very wide variation in the number of branchial filaments, a neotype is being designated and it is redescribed to better define the species. Further, the posterior parapodia from these Naples specimens have bidentate multiarticulated neurochaetae, which confirms that Trophonia eruca belongs in Piromis, and that Balanochaeta is a junior synonym for Piromis . After studying all of Fauvel’s specimens available in Paris, it can be concluded that he combined under the same name two different species belonging to two different genera; one is the typical P. eruca herein restricted, while the other one, provided with few (10) branchial filaments, has anchylosed bidentate neurohooks in posterior chaetigers and belongs in Trophoniella .</p><p>Distribution. Mediterranean Sea, mixed or sandy sediments, shallow water.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D3D263FFF44FEC66317FD56	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D23263CFF44FD7E6235F83F.text	D34C87B84D23263CFF44FD7E6235F83F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis fauchaldi	<div><p>Piromis fauchaldi n. sp.</p><p>Figure 6</p><p>Type material. Eastern Pacific Ocean, Gulf of California. Holotype (LACM-AHF -2511), Agua Verde Bay, Baja California Sur, Knudsen Sta. 127 (25°31ʹ24ʺ N, 111°03ʹ56ʺ W), 98 feet (31.6 m), green mud, shells, 25 Jan. 1955, Knudsen, coll. One paratype (LACM-AHF-2512), anterior fragment, damaged, previously dissected, R/V Velero III, Sta. 751 (23°22ʹ45ʺ N, 109°24ʹ15ʺ W), off Los Frailes, Baja California Sur, 5–15 fathoms, sand, algae, 4 Apr. 1937. One paratype (LACM-AHF-2513), anterior fragment, damaged, R/V Velero II I, Sta. 1733 (23°24ʹ0 7ʺ N, 109°24ʹ15ʺ W 23°23ʹ50ʺ N, 109°24ʹ30ʺ W), 3.7 km SE off Cabo Pulmo, Baja California Sur, 21 fathoms, 13 Mar. 1949.</p><p>Description. Holotype complete, broken into two parts, previously dissected anteriorly, many chaetae broken (Fig. 6 A); tunic papillated, with large adhering sediment particles, especially dorsally (Fig. 6 B); papillae in two longitudinal rows dorsally, four rows ventrally; each papilla cirriform, capitate. Holotype 25(11+14) mm long, 1.8 mm wide, cephalic cage 2.8 mm long, 75(28+47) chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end observed by dissecting holotype. Cephalic hood short, marginal papillae not visible. Prostomium short, four eyes, fused, directed fronto- and posterolaterally. Caruncle pale, well-developed, separating branchial lobes, extending almost to branchial plate split (Fig. 6 D). Palps pale, palp keels rounded, short. Branchiae cirriform, arising on tongue-like protuberance, distally cleft, each filament with irregular dark bands along their length, about 60 filaments per side. Palps as long as largest branchiae. Dorsal and ventral lips reduced, lateral lips wide, better developed. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae damaged, about 1/9 body length, or 1.5 times longer than body width. Chaetigers 1–2 involved in cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, lateral and ventrolateral fascicles; each with 2–3 noto- and 3–4 neurochaetae per bundle. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with median lobe, projecting anteriorly, bent ventrally, with four or five distal papillae; anterior chaetigers with long papillae, chaetigers 2–3 with dorsal papillae making short, conical notopodial lobes directed forward. Chaetigers 1–3 of similar length. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; chaetiger 4 with thin multiarticulate neurohooks, one with bidentate tip. Chaetigers 3–7 with ventrolateral groups of 3–5 short papillae. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia well developed, especially in anterior chaetigers; parapodia lateral, median neuropodia ventrolateral. Notopodia with one pre- and three postchaetal papillae, each cirriform, capitate, longer by chaetigers 11–15, each about 1/3–1/2 as long as notochaetae. Neuropodia with one pre- and 1–2 postchaetal papillae, smaller than notopodial ones.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in short oblique row, five notochaetae per bundle, about half as long as body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, each with basal articles short, medial and distal ones long, becoming shorter towards tip (Fig. 6 E). Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–3, chaetiger 4 with single hooked tip, entire, from chaetiger 5 all neurochaetae bifid multiarticulated hooks, arranged in transverse row (Fig. 6 F), 4–5 hooks per ramus in following chaetigers (Fig 6 G), many broken. Neurohooks with 11–12 articles, all long throughout the chaetae but 1–2 median ones slightly longer, decreasing in size distally; distal article slightly falcate, tapering, bidentate.</p><p>Posterior region tapering, without sediment particles, pygidium with dorso-terminal anus, without anal cirri.</p><p>Etymology. This species is being named after Kristian Fauchald, good friend and better mentor, in recognition of his many contributions to polychaete taxonomy, because he noticed that these specimens belong to an undescribed species, and especially to acknowledge his encouraging, unrestricted, and long-term support for my studies on the group.</p><p>Type locality. Agua Verde Bay, Baja California Sur.</p><p>Variation. The two paratypes were anterior fragments, one (LACM-AHF-2512) was 17 mm long, 2.5 mm wide, cephalic cage broken, 3 mm long, 42 chaetigers, whereas the other (LACM-AHF-2513) was 25 mm long, 4 mm wide, cephalic cage 7 mm long, 23 chaetigers.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis fauchaldi n. sp. is closely allied with P. robertsi (Hartman, 1951) from the Gulf of Mexico. Both species have large sediment particles covering the body; however, they differ in the relative number of notochaetae, development of the ventrolateral tubercles in chaetiger 1, and on the number of articles in neurohooks of posterior chaetigers. Thus, P. fauchaldi n. sp. has only five notochaetae while P. robertsi has up to eight per bundle; ventrolateral tubercles are present in P. robertsi, while in P. fauchaldi n. sp. they are modified into a group of 3–5 papillae along the first five chaetigers, but they are not grouped into a tubercle either individually or collectively, and the neurohooks in P. fauchaldi n. sp. have more articles (10–12) than in P. robertsi (3–7).</p><p>Distribution. Southwestern Gulf of California, in muddy, sandy or mixed bottoms, in 10–40 m depth.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D23263CFF44FD7E6235F83F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D21263AFF44FF3E64FEFE7E.text	D34C87B84D21263AFF44FF3E64FEFE7E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis kisemboanus (Augener 1918) Augener 1918	<div><p>Piromis kisemboanus (Augener, 1918) n. comb.</p><p>Figure 7</p><p>Stylarioides kinsemboanus Augener, 1918: 440 –442, Pl. 6, Fig. 150, Pl. 7, Fig. 214, Text fig. 64; Fauvel &amp; Rullier, 1959:181; Amoureux, 1973:61.</p><p>Type material. Not available in ZMH, probably lost (A. Brandt 2004, pers. comm.).</p><p>Additional material. Northwestern Africa. One specimen (MNHN-507), Pointe Bernard (13°39ʹ19ʺ N, 17°25ʹ53ʺ W), Dakar, Senegal, no date, R. Lourie (coll.). One specimen (USNM unnumbered), anterior fragment, off Route de la Corniche, near Musee Dynamique, Dakar, Senegal, heavy surf, sandy beach, 24 Jun. 1968, M.E. Rice, coll.</p><p>Description. Specimen complete (MNHN-A507), almost broken in two parts (Fig. 7 A). Body clavate, slightly tapering posteriorly; tunic papillated, with large sediment particles over dorsal surface (Fig. 7 B), extending to pygidium; smaller particles present laterally extending to neuropodia. Papillae arranged in longitudinal rows, barely exposed dorsally, arranged as four papillae per segment, more exposed ventrally (Fig. 7 B), four papillae per segment. Body 20.5 mm long, 2.0 mm wide, cephalic cage 3.0 mm long, 52 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end observed by dissection. Cephalic hood short, margin smooth. Prostomium elevated, continued posteriorly as a darker short cone; two large black eyes present (posterior eyes not visible). Caruncle well developed, extending to branchial plate margin, median keel and lateral ridges pale. Branchiae with dark, discontinuous spots, about 20 per lateral group. Palps pale brown, about three times as long as branchiae. Palp lobes rounded, elevated. Dorsal lip darker, lateral and ventral lips unpigmented. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage present, chaetae 1/7 as long as whole body, or 1/3 longer than body width. Chaetigers 1–3 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, dorsolateral in chaetiger 1, lateral in following chaetigers; 5–6 chaetae per fascicle. Anterior dorsal margin of first chaetiger medially depressed, with a sand grain on it. Anterior, median, and posterior chaetigers with long notopodial papillae, about 1/3 as long as notochaetae; chaetigers 2–8 with low lobes, resembling posterior ones. Chaetigers 1–3 of about the same length. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; multiarticulated simple neurohooks start in chaetiger 5. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia well developed, lateral; median neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia with long chaetal lobes and long digitate papillae (Fig. 7 D); 1–2 prechaetal and 2 postchaetal papillae per rami.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in a transverse row, four per bundle, each about half as long as body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, each with short articles basally, medium-sized medially, long distally (Fig. 7 E). Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–4; multiarticulate simple hooks from chaetiger 5, arranged in a transverse row (Fig. 7 F), posteriorly in oblique row (Fig. 7 G), 4–5 throughout the body (more chaetae in larger specimens). Neurohook handle with short anchylosed articles basally, a variable number of long median articles, and longer cylindrical distal part with a single curved fang.</p><p>Posterior end truncate; pygidium with terminal anus, without anal cirri.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis kisemboanus (Augener, 1918) n. comb., might resemble P. arenosus if the sediment cover extended throughout the whole body, or it might be closer to P. w e b s t e r i Day, 1973 n. status if the sediment cover is restricted to the dorsal and lateral surfaces. The issue is that in the original description, the ventral surface was depicted as including fine sediment particles, and the lack of type materials requires a double inclusion in the key and a comparison to two sets of similar species. Thus, P. kisemboanus differs from P. arenosus by having longer notopodial papillae (about 1/2–1/3 as long as notochaetae) than in P. arenosus (about 1/4–1/5 as long as notochaetae), and in the shape of the distal article in neurohooks, such that in P. kisemboanus they are cylindrical, tapering, mostly unidentate, while in P. arenosus they are medially widened and bidentate. On the other hand, by having sediment cover restricted to the dorsal and lateral surfaces and a negligible amount of sediment grains ventrally, the most closely related species to P. kisemboanus would be P. w e b s t e r i. They differ in that the former has larger sediment grains on the tunic and about four notochaetae per bundle, while the latter has fine sediment grains on the tunic and about eight notochaetae per bundle.</p><p>Both, Monro (1933) and Day (1955), regarded S. kinsemboanus Augener, 1918, as a junior synonym of Piromis arenosus Kinberg, 1867 . Since the neurohooks are bidentate in the latter, they regarded the accessory tooth in the former as fragile; however, there are two other differences in the relative size of the notopodial papillae and in the terminal articles in neurochaetae. Thus, P. kisemboanus is closely allied to P. arenosus but differs from it by having longer parapodial papillae, and cylindrical or tapering neurochaetae, instead of being distally expanded.</p><p>The type locality was written as Kinsembo; however, the name for this place in the Zaire Province of Angola should rather be Kisembo (07°43ʹ0 6ʺ S, 13°03ʹ0 0ʺ E), which in turn has been written as Kiusembo, and even as Quicembo, but Kinsembo is orthographically incorrect and hence the spelling of the species epithet must be corrected. The best specimen (MNHN-A507), was collected far from the type locality, but it originates from tropical Western Africa, probably from shallow water, and is regarded as belonging to this species.</p><p>Distribution. Subtropical and tropical Western Africa, in shallow water.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D21263AFF44FF3E64FEFE7E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D262638FF44F99B6443FC52.text	D34C87B84D262638FF44F99B6443FC52.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis robertsi (Hartman 1951) Hartman 1951	<div><p>Piromis robertsi (Hartman, 1951)</p><p>Figure 8</p><p>Semiodera roberti Hartman, 1951:99, Pl 26, Figs. 1–4.</p><p>Piromis roberti: Hartman, 1961: 123 n. comb.; Fauchald, 1972: 416 n. comb.; Milligan, 1984:47.5–47.7, Figs. 47.1–2.</p><p>Type material. Gulf of Mexico. Holotype (LACM-AHF -526), Grand Terre (29°16ʹ54ʺ N, 89°55ʹ45ʺ W), Sugar House Bend, Louisiana, 25 Jun. 1942, J.H. Roberts, coll.</p><p>Additional material. Gulf of Mexico. Anterior fragment (USNM 45650), previously dissected and first two chaetigers separated from the rest of the body, together with three anterior fragments of P. w e b s t e r i, Tampa Bay, Florida, 1963, J.L. Taylor, coll. (first neurohooks apparently from chaetiger 7). Anterior fragment (USNM 55986), damaged, R/V Columbus Iselin, Sta. 2528 (29°54ʹ58.6ʺ N, 86°04ʹ58.5ʺ W), 37 m. Anterior fragment (USNM 74837) apparently fixed with alcohol, Sta. number not specified (30°20ʹ N, 88°47ʹ W) (first chaetiger with a trifid structure on its anterior margin). Anterior fragment (USNM 75920), R/V Captain Brady Joseph, Sta. M10-2 (29°39ʹ52ʺ N, 93°28ʹ34ʺ W), 9.8 m, Apr. 1982, G.R. Gaston, coll. (first neurohooks in chaetiger 5; second chaetiger with two ventral tubercles). Anterior fragment (USNM 75921), R/V Captain Brady Joseph, Sta. M10-2 (29°39ʹ52ʺ N, 93°28ʹ34ʺ W), 9.8 m, Apr. 1982, G.R. Gaston, coll. (first neurohooks in chaetiger 5; second chaetiger with two ventral tubercles). Two juveniles (USNM 75922), one complete, R/V Captain Brady Joseph, Sta. M10A-6 (29°39ʹ52ʺ N, 93°28ʹ34ʺ W), off Cameron, Louisiana, 9.8 m, Sep. 1982, G.R. Gaston, coll. (first neurohooks from chaetiger 5). A juvenile (USNM 75925), broken in two, R/V Captain Brady Joseph, Sta. M10A-6 (29°40ʹ0 9ʺ N, 93°28ʹ12ʺ W), off Cameron, Louisiana, 9.4 m, Aug. 1981, G.R. Gaston, coll. (first neurohooks from chaetiger 5). One specimen (USNM 754456), Sta. 27 (30°18ʹ17ʺ N, 88°43ʹ0 4ʺ W), 2.6 m, 23 Oct. 1980 (tunic very thin with fine sediment grains; chaetiger 3 with thin bifid hooks, become thicker by chaetiger 4).</p><p>Description. Holotype damaged, most chaetae broken, cylindrical, compressed because of inadequate preservation (Fig. 8 A); tunic papillated, with large sediment particles adhered, especially dorsally (Fig. 8 B, D); papillae in two longitudinal rows dorsally, four rows ventrally, mostly eroded (Fig. 8 C); each papilla cirriform, capitate. Holotype 58 mm long, 2.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 3.5 mm long, 107 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end damaged, everted, some portions already eroded. Cephalic hood short, margin unknown. Prostomium elevated; four eyes, fused, directed fronto- and posterolaterally. Caruncle well developed, separating branchial lobes. Palps lost, palp keels rounded, short. Branchiae cirriform, arising on tongue-like protuberance, about 60 filaments per side. Size relationships with palps or among themselves unknown. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage present, chaetae about 1/15 body length, or slightly longer than body width. Chaetigers 1–2 involved in cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, lateral and ventrolateral fascicles; each with 3–4 notochaetae and 2–3 neurochaetae per bundle. Anterior dorsal margin of first chaetiger with a median trifid lobe, projected anteriorly; anterior chaetigers with long papillae, chaetigers 2–3 with notopodial lobes. Chaetigers 1–3 of similar length. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; chaetiger 4 with thick, bifid neurohooks (in one topotype). Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia lateral, well developed, especially in anterior chaetigers; median neuropodia ventrolateral (Fig. 8 D). Notopodia with one pre- and three postchaetal papillae, each cirriform, capitate. Neuropodia with one pre- and two postchaetal papillae, smaller than notopodial ones.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in a short transverse row, 7–8 notochaetae per bundle, about as long as 1/3 body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries (Fig. 8 E), basal and medial articles short, become longer distally. Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–2, chaetiger 3 with a multiarticulated capillary with hooked tip, entire, from chaetiger 4 all neurochaetae bifid hooks, arranged in a transverse row, 7–8 hooks per ramus, continued to last chaetigers, many hooks broken, articulations shorter in anterior and median chaetigers (Fig. 8 F), shorter in posterior chaetigers (Fig. 8 G). Posterior neurohooks with 3–5 long articles; distal piece slightly falcate, tapering, bidentate.</p><p>Posterior region tapering slightly; pygidium with dorsal anus, exposed muscular ring, without anal cirri.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis robertsi (Hartman, 1951) resembles P. fauchaldi n. sp. from the Gulf of California, because both species have large sediment particles on the tunic. They differ in three features: the number of notochaetae, presence of ventrolateral tubercles in chaetiger 1, and in the number of articles per neurohook in posterior chaetigers. Thus, while P. robertsi has up to eight notochaetae per bundle, there are only five in P. fauchaldi n. sp.; P. robertsi has ventrolateral tubercles which are missing in P. fauchaldi n. sp., where a group of papillae take the same position but not fused to form a tubercle. Finally, there are fewer articles per posterior neurohook in P. robertsi (3– 7), while there are almost twice as many in P. fauchaldi (10–12).</p><p>The name of the species should be changed since it was named after Mr. J.H. Roberts, the collector of the type material; the name is therefore emended to be spelled robertsi (ICZN 1999, Art. 33.2.1).</p><p>Distribution. Northern Gulf of Mexico, in shallow water.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D262638FF44F99B6443FC52	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D242636FF44FC7D6511FE7E.text	D34C87B84D242636FF44FC7D6511FE7E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis suni	<div><p>Piromis suni n. sp.</p><p>Figure 9</p><p>Stylarioides eruca: Okuda 1937a:52, Text fig. 2–3 (non Claparède, 1868). Pherusa eruca: Imajima &amp; Hartman 1964:302 –303 (non Claparède, 1868).</p><p>Type material. South China Sea. Holotype (SMF-15348) and paratypes (SMF), Senckenberg Museum Hainan 1992 Expedition, Sta. B92-17B-13, Sanya Bay (37°07ʹ0 3ʺ N, 122°30ʹ30ʺ E), Shandong Sheng, China, 6 m, 25 Mar. 1992, D. Fiege, coll.</p><p>Additional material. Japan. An anterior fragment (CMNH-1051), damaged, off Shimoda, Japan, 40 m (about 20 chaetigers, cephalic cage chaetae broken; sediment grains completely cover the body, dorsally and ventrally; neurochaetae all bidentate, with short articles).</p><p>Description. Holotype (SMF-15348) anterior fragment (Fig. 9 A); body tapering posteriorly to blunt cone in paratypes, pale brown; tunic papillated with sediment particles abundant, densely packed, completely covering body wall; anterior region not bent ventrally. Larger capitate papillae arranged in transverse rows, one per segment dorsally (Fig. 9 B) and ventrally (Fig. 9 C), each with about ten papillae per row. Holotype 22 mm long, 3.8 mm wide, cephalic cage 4 mm long, 30 chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic hood not exposed. Holotype not dissected to avoid further damage; paratype transparent, without eversible anterior end, probably exposed and broken during sampling. Anterior end details unknown.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae about as long as body width. Chaetigers 1-3 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short rows, dorsolateral in chaetiger 1, lateral in chaetigers 2-3; chaetiger 1 with seven notochaetae and six neurochaetae per side; chaetigers 2–3 with 5–6 notochaetae and 4 neurochaetae per side.</p><p>Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with a trifid swollen bulb, median projection broken, tip lost, laterals about 1.5 times longer than median bulb. Anterior chaetigers with long papillae, chaetigers 2–5 with notopodial lobes. Chaetigers 1–3 progressively larger. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage chaetae to body chaetae abrupt; shorter multiarticulate bidentate neurohooks start in chaetiger 4. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia well developed, forming notopodial lobes in anterior chaetigers (1–5). Parapodia lateral, median neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia with long chaetal lobes and long digitate papillae, two pre- and two postchaetal papillae per ramus.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in short transverse rows, 7–8 per bundle, about 1/3 as long as body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries (Fig. 9 D), short articles basally, medium-sized then long medially, becoming slightly shorter distally. Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–3; multiarticulated bidentate neurohooks from chaetiger 4, with articles medium-sized medially, becoming long by chaetiger 10 (Fig. 9 E). Each median neurohook with short articles basally, long articles medially, then progressively decreasing to mediumsized articles almost to the distal article (3–4 times longer than wide). Median and posterior neurochaetae with anchylosed articles basally, 2–3 long articles medially, and then short to medium-sized articles to the distal article. (Fig. 9 F). Tip hooked, bidentate; accessory tooth flat, wide, as long as the fang.</p><p>Posterior end blunt (observed in paratype), last 20 chaetigers without sediment particles; pygidium conical, anus dorso-terminal, without anal cirri.</p><p>Etymology. This species is being named after Dr. Ruiping Sun, from the Institute of Oceanology, Academia Sinica, in recognition of his many publications on the taxonomy of Chinese polychaetes, and because he was involved in the field and lab work during the Senckenberg Museum Hainan Expedition.</p><p>Type locality. Sanya Bay, South China Sea.</p><p>Variation. Paratypes were an anterior and a posterior fragments; anterior fragment damaged, 32.5 mm long, 4.0 mm wide, cephalic cage 2 mm long, 52 chaetigers; whereas the posterior fragment had 48 chaetigers; without sediment particles over the last 20 chaetigers.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis suni n. sp. is closely allied to P. e r u c a (Claparède, 1868) in the general body pattern. They clearly differ in the type of neurohooks, however. In P. suni n. sp. the median and posterior chaetigers have neurohooks with a single or a few long articles medially, while the distal part is multiarticulated and continuing as such almost to the tip. In contrast, in P. eruca, median and posterior neurospines have few long articles while the distal one is often the longest. The previous records of P. e r u c a from Japan do not agree with the Mediterranean species, and are herein regarded as likely conspecific with P. suni .</p><p>Distribution. The species is widespread in the Western North and Central Pacific Ocean, from Japan to the South China Sea, in shallow water.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D242636FF44FC7D6511FE7E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D2A2637FF44FE5664B3FB16.text	D34C87B84D2A2637FF44FE5664B3FB16.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis vossae	<div><p>Piromis vossae n. sp.</p><p>Figure 10</p><p>Type material. Western Atlantic Ocean. Holotype (USNM 1146766) and paratype (ECOSUR), off the southeastern tip of Florida, R/V Gerda, Cruise 6214, Sta. 22 (25°44ʹ N, 80°04ʹ W), 125 m, 20 Jun. 1962.</p><p>Description. Holotype posteriorly incomplete, oval in cross section, completely covered by a thin layer of white sediment grains (Fig. 10 A). Anterior end with five chaetigers directed anteriorly. Anterior end retracted in both types; paratype with a longitudinal cut that destroyed the anterior end. Body covered by papillae, mostly not passing the sediment layer; few exposed, especially ventrally towards the posterior part of the holotype; each papilla thin, capitate. Sediment particles larger on dorsal and lateral surfaces (Fig. 10 B), smaller ventrally (Fig. 10 C). Holotype 24 mm long, 1.5 mm wide, cephalic cage chaetae 2.5 mm long, 44 chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae as long as 1.5 times body width. Chaetigers 1–2 involved in cephalic cage; notopodia 1– 2 with three chaetae, neuropodia 1–2 with five chaetae. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with a median digitate projection, eroded in holotype. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae gradual; median and posterior chaetigers with neurohooks slightly different from the anterior ones. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Anterior parapodia low, not forming notopodial lobes. Parapodia lateral, neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia poorly developed, one elongate, postchaetal papillae per ramus.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in short transverse row, 5–6 chaetae per bundle (7–8 in paratype), as long as onehalf body width (longer in posterior chaetigers); all notochaetae multiarticulated (Fig. 10 D), with medium-sized articles basally, becoming progressively longer in median and distal regions; chaetigers 1–2 with long neurochaetae, slightly shorter in posterior parapodia; 4–5 per bundle, arranged in a transverse row; each with medium-sized articles basally, longer medially, gradually decreasing in size (Fig. 10 E); posterior neurochaetae (Fig. 10 F) with basal articles anchylosed, 1–2 large articles medially, then slightly longer, decreasing in size distally. Tip bidentate, accessory tooth laminate, thinner than main tooth, of about the same length.</p><p>Posterior end unknown.</p><p>Etymology. This species is named after Nancy Voss, a well-known expert on cephalopods, in recognition of her painstaking care of the abundant and rich invertebrate collections made during the University of Miami Deep Sea Expeditions. Through her kind support, these collections have been very useful for the study of Grand Caribbean invertebrates in general, and she has encouraged our research in polychaetes for many years.</p><p>Type locality. Straits of Florida.</p><p>Variation. The paratype is posteriorly incomplete, being 22 mm long, 2 mm wide, cephalic cage chaetae 3 mm long, 35 chaetigers.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis vossae n. sp. belongs to the group of species provided with large sediment particles over the body. It differs from the other species in the group because their notopodial lobes are very low, if present, and because their neurohooks are not markedly reduced in length in the anterior region; they rather gradually decrease in size posteriorly.</p><p>Distribution. Only known from the type locality, in 125 m depth. The same sample contained some aphroditids, cirratulids, trichobranchids, and sipunculans (Bastida et al. 2001:7).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D2A2637FF44FE5664B3FB16	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D2B2635FF44FABE63FBFAAA.text	D34C87B84D2B2635FF44FABE63FBFAAA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis websteri Day 1973	<div><p>Piromis websteri Day, 1973 status novo</p><p>Figure 11</p><p>Trophonia arenosa Webster, 1879:245 –246, Pl. 7, Figs. 92–97. Piromis eruca websteri Day, 1973:109, no figs.</p><p>Type material. Northwestern Atlantic Ocean. Syntypes (USNM 433), H.E. Webster coll., id., Virginia, no further data (two almost complete specimens lacking posterior end, anterior end dissected; there might have been a third specimen since one of the original illustrations indicates a cross section of a median chaetiger; most chaetae broken, sediment cover removed from many areas. Longer syntype 43 mm long, 5 mm wide, 63 chaetigers.</p><p>Additional material. Virginia: Anterior fragment (USNM 57058), slightly damaged, Chincoteague, Chesapeake Bay, 12 Aug. 1965, in eelgrass (dorsal lobes in chaetigers 2–6). Two specimens (VIMS-535), Eelgrass bed, Chincoteague, 12 Aug. 1965, M.L. Wass, coll. (both with neurospines in chaetiger 6). North Carolina: Two specimens (USNM 53880), one complete with swollen posterior end, Banks Channel, Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, intertidal, muddy sand, no date, T. Fox, coll. (first neurohooks in chaetiger 6; second chaetiger with two ventral tubercles). One specimen (USNM 53881), Banks Channel, Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, intertidal, shelly mud, 27 Jul. 1973, C. Jenner, coll. (first neurohooks in chaetiger 6; second chaetiger with two ventral tubercles). One specimen (USNM 53883), without posterior end, Banks Channel, Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, sandy mud, 8 Mar. 1974, C. Jenner, coll. (first neurohooks in chaetiger 6; second chaetiger with two ventral tubercles). One specimen (USNM 53884), without posterior end, Banks Channel, Wrightsville Beach, North Carolina, soft mud, 2 Nov. 1974, C. Jenner, coll. (first neurohooks in chaetiger 6; second chaetiger with two ventral tubercles). One specimen (USNM 53885), from muddy sand, Bogue Sound, Morehead City, 23 June 1975, S.L. Gardiner, coll. One specimen (USNM 61742) from Middle Marsh, soft mud, 23 Jul. 1976. Gulf of Mexico: One specimen (UMML-unnumbered), Rookery Bay (26°01ʹ30ʺ N, 81°44ʹ40ʺ W), 32.1.7, no further data. Three anterior fragments (USNM 45650), together with an anterior fragment of P. robertsi, Tampa Bay, Florida, 1963, J.L. Taylor, coll. (all with neurohooks from chaetiger 6). One specimen (USNM 71158), 3 mi SE off Dauphin Island (30°11ʹ17ʺ N, 88°07ʹ17ʺ W), 18 Sep. 1981, 42 feet, S.L. Gardiner id. Three specimens (USNM 61742), one complete, “Middle Marshʺ, North Carolina, 23 Jul. 1976, soft mud, S.L. Gardiner, coll. (dorsal, paired tubercles in chaetigers 2–6). One specimen (USNM 75920), anterior fragment, damaged, R/V Captain Brady Joseph, Sta. M10-2 (29°39ʹ52ʺ N, 93°28ʹ34ʺ W), off Cameron, Louisiana, 9.8 m, Feb. 1982, G.R. Gaston, coll. (hooks start apparently in chaetiger 6). One specimen (USNM 75921), anterior fragment, R/V Captain Brady Joseph, Sta. M10-2 (29°39ʹ52ʺ N, 93°28ʹ34ʺ W), off Cameron, Louisiana, 9.8 m, Apr. 1982, G.R. Gaston, coll. (hooks start in chaetiger 6). One specimen (USNM 75923), R/V Captain Brady Joseph, Sta. 10-6(29°39ʹ52ʺ N, 93°28ʹ34’ W), 9.8 m, May 1982, G.R. Gaston, coll.</p><p>Redescription. Smaller syntype tapering posteriorly, oval in cross section, sediment cover removed in many areas, remaining as a thin layer of sand grains with clear, eroded areas dorsally and laterally (Fig. 11 A), sediment cover better conserved in other specimens (Fig. 11 B). Anterior end with five chaetigers directed anteriorly. Syntype 28 mm long, 3 mm wide, cephalic cage 4 mm long, 58 chaetigers (with a longitudinal dissection, ventrally along chaetigers 45–52).</p><p>Cephalic hood not exposed, anterior end retracted (original dissection by Day; other specimens with everted anterior end show a short cephalic hood, as long as chaetiger 1 length). Anterior end details based on non-type materials (Fig. 11 C; VIMS-535). Prostomium low; eyes large, slightly pigmented. Caruncle with diffuse pigmentation. Another specimen (USNM 53883), with anterior end everted; prostomium low; eyes large, fused. Caruncle with median keel pale, lateral ridges basally pigmented.</p><p>Cephalic hood short, margin entire, not crenulated or papillated. Palps long, corrugated, with black spots; palp keels low (larger specimens with pigmented. swollen palp keels). Mouth with two thick lateral lips, dorsal lip reduced, ventral lip thin; buccal organ exposed. Branchiae cirriform, placed on a tongue-shaped lobe, separated in two lateral groups, each with about 60 branchial filaments. Size relationship with palps not discernible. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae slightly longer than body width; cephalic cage made by the first three chaetigers, but longest chaetae in chaetigers 1–2; chaetae arranged in a tuft. Notopodia 1–2 with 2–3 chaetae, neuropodia 1–2 with 3–4 chaetae.</p><p>Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with a median projection, distally eroded; chaetigers 2–3 with pair of dorsolateral elongated papillae, and single long notopodial papilla. Dorsal tubercles eroded in syntypes, present in non-type specimens from North Carolina. Post-cephalic cage chaetigers not elongated. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; chaetiger 4 with short notochaetae, bifid neurohooks replacing capillaries (after Webster and Day; no chaetae left, but confirmed in the additional materials). Chaetiger 1 with two ventrolateral lobes, branched, on its anterior margin, better preserved in some specimens (Fig. 11 B, USNM 53883). Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Anterior parapodia projecting more than median or posterior ones; those as lower chaetal lobes. Parapodia placed over the body corners in cross section, at about the same distance to each other. Notopodia with long pre- and postchaetal papillae, the latter longer, especially on chaetigers 1–4.</p><p>Median notochaetae in transverse row, with about six chaetae per bundle (up to 11 in larger specimens), reduced to 5 (7 in larger specimens) in posterior chaetigers, about 1/3 as long as body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries (Fig. 11 D) with short articles basally, longer medially and distally. Neuropodia less prominent than notopodia; long papillae mostly postchaetal. From chaetiger 4, 6–7 multiarticulate bidentate neurohooks, arranged in a J-shape. Anterior and median chaetigers with neurochaetae with long articles (Fig. 11 E); posterior chaetigers with 4–5 long articles. Tips bidentate, accessory tooth thin.</p><p>Posterior end damaged in Virginia specimens (specimens from Alabama and another one from North Carolina with terminal anus (another specimen with dorsoterminal anus), without anal cirri, but with marginal papillae, and a ventral elongated lobe).</p><p>Remarks. Piromis websteri Day, 1973, originally described as a subspecies, does closely resemble P. k is e m - boanus, but differs sufficiently to warrant full species status and is herein so elevated. Piromis websteri and P. kisemboanus differ in the relative size of the sediment particles that adhere to the tunic and on the relative number of notochaetae. Thus, in P. w e b s t e r i the sediment grains are fine and there are about eight notochaetae per bundle, while in P. kisemboanus the sediment particles are larger and there are about four notochaetae per bundle.</p><p>Distribution. Intertidal or shallow water in Virginia, North Carolina and in the Gulf of Mexico.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D2B2635FF44FABE63FBFAAA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D292633FF44FA656214FD56.text	D34C87B84D292633FF44FA656214FD56.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Piromis wehei	<div><p>Piromis wehei n. sp.</p><p>Figure 12</p><p>Type material. Northwestern Indian Ocean, Sokotra Archipelago. Holotype (SMF-15408), Sokotra UNOPS Expedition, Gulf of Aden, Sta. 713 (12°09.89ʹ N, 52°22.28ʹ E), 10–20 m, 6 Apr. 2000, T. Wehe coll. Paratype (SMF-15339), MSGR 1993 Expedition, near PTL9, Persian Gulf, 7 Feb. 1993, M. Apel coll.</p><p>Additional material. Northeastern Indian Ocean, Bay of Bengal. One specimen (LACM-AHF-2514), International Indian Ocean Expedition, Sta. RH 33, mouth of Godavari estuary, Kakinada Bay, Andhra State, 1.6 km SSE of mouth in canal, brown mud with about 55% clay, 2.3 m, 22 Mar. 1964, H. Sanders, coll., anterior fragment, slightly twisted, many chaetae broken.</p><p>Description. Holotype (SMF-15408) complete, regenerating posterior end (Fig. 12 A); body whitish, chaetose, completely covered by sediment particles, larger dorsally (Fig. 12 B), slightly smaller ventrally (Fig. 12 C); anterior region slightly bent over its ventral side; tunic papillated. Papillae arranged in longitudinal rows, two dorsal and four ventral. Holotype 29 mm long, 3 mm wide, cephalic cage 5 mm long, 72 chaetigers (regenerating the last 3–4 chaetigers).</p><p>Anterior end observed in paratype (Fig. 12 D). Cephalic hood short, margin smooth. Prostomium brownish. Caruncle well developed, extending to branchial plate margin, lateral ridges and median keel pale, neighbor areas brownish. Branchiae cirriform, spotted, arising on a tongue-like protuberance, separated in two lateral groups, each with about ten concentric, more or less alternating rows; each group with about 130 filaments. Palps shorter than proximal branchiae, spotted; palp keels rounded, low. Lips pale; dorsal and lateral lips fused; ventral lip reduced. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae about 1/6 as long as body length, almost twice as long as body width. Anterior chaetigers with long papillae, chaetigers 2–11 with notopodial lobes. Chaetigers 1–3 progressively longer. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; multiarticulate bidentate neurohooks start in chaetiger 6. Gonopodial lobes not visible (once the tunic is lifted in paratype, they are small, round, pale, in chaetigers 5–6).</p><p>Parapodia well developed, rounded dorsal lobes in anterior chaetigers (2–8). Parapodia lateral, median neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia with long chaetal lobes and long capitate papillae; both with 1–2 shorter prechaetal and 4–5 longer postchaetal papillae per ramus; noto- and neuropodia distant to each other.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in a ∪-shaped row, transverse to body axis, six notochaetae per bundle, half as long as body width, slightly thinner than neurochaetae; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries (Fig. 12 E), short articles basally, becoming longer medially, decreasing in size distally, distal article fragile, hooked, unidentate. Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with medium-sized articles in chaetigers 1–3, articles become longer in chaetigers 4–5; from chaetiger 6 all neurochaetae shorter, multiarticulated hooks, arranged in a transverse row in anterior chaetigers (Fig. 12 F); median and posterior chaetigers with neurohooks arranged in a J-pattern; 8–9 per bundle (10–11 in paratype), less abundant in far posterior chaetigers; each neurohook with short anchylosed articles basally, then very long articles, decreasing towards the tip (Fig. 12 G). Distal article very long, especially in posterior chaetigers (8–14 times longer than wide). Tip hooked, bidentate, accessory tooth not passing the fang.</p><p>Posterior end conical (in regeneration); pygidium with anus dorsoterminal, without anal cirri. Paratype with body wall broken, exposing brownish oocytes, about 125 μm in diameter.</p><p>Etymology. This species is named after Dr. Thomas Wehe, in recognition of his publications on polychaetes, especially his compilation on Northeastern Indian Ocean polychaetes, and because he collected the holotype.</p><p>Type locality. Sokotra Archipelago, Yemen, in shallow water.</p><p>Variation. The paratype is a mature female, most sediment particles eroded, broken in three pieces. Paratype 43 (17+9+17) mm long, 4.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 7.5 mm long, and has 87 (31+15+41) chaetigers; oocytes about 150 µm in diameter.</p><p>Remarks. Piromis wehei n. sp. resembles P. brisegnoi n. sp. because both bodies with long, abundant chaetae. They differ because in the former notochaetae are thinner than neurochaetae, while in the latter the notochaetae are very thick, being as thick as neurochaetae, and P. w e h e i has a thick cover of sediment particles, which is not seen in P. brisegnoi . Further, P. w e h e i n. sp. differs from most other described species because most of the sediment particles are adhered on their smallest surface, giving them a very irregular profile.</p><p>Distribution. Only known from two localities in the Northwestern Indian Ocean, in shallow water.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D292633FF44FA656214FD56	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D2F2633FF44FD7E64E0FA0F.text	D34C87B84D2F2633FF44FD7E64E0FA0F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma Grube 1877	<div><p>Pycnoderma Grube, 1877</p><p>Pycnoderma Grube, 1877b:540; Hartman, 1965:62; Day, 1967:655 –656.</p><p>Diagnosis emended. Body cylindrical. Tunic thick, opaque, or transparent. Cephalic cage well developed; notochaetae dorsal, sometimes very long. Anterior margin of chaetiger 1 papillate, without dorsal projection. Body papillae often minute, abundant over the body, sometimes arranged in rows. Posterior noto- and neurochaetae with few, long articles (oligo-articulated). Posterior neurospines with few articles, distal articulation short and blunt, elongate and thin, or short and foliose-aristate. Branchiae cirriform, arising over a tongue-shaped branchial plate.</p><p>Type species. Pycnoderma congoense Grube, 1877, by monotypy.</p><p>Remarks. The original diagnosis (Grube 1877b:540) was: “Corpus vermiforme, gracile, cute densa, hyaline, papillis minimis obsita, segmentis numerosis. Fasciculi setarum utrinque distichi, setae superiors et inferiors capillaries, dense annulatae, segmentorum anteriorum aliquot protentae, ceteris longiores. Branchiae filiformes, segmento buccali affixae, lobus capitalis, tentaculata retahenda.” Its translation would be: Body worm-shaped, slender, skin dense, hyaline, papillae small contained (within the tunic), many segments. Chaetal fascicles paired, lateral, superior and inferior chaetae capillaries, densely annulated, anterior segments directed forwards, others long. Branchiae filiform, fixed in mouth segment, head lobe (and) tentacles retractile.</p><p>As herein defined, Pycnoderma includes, besides the type species, P. congoense Grube, 1877, P. dannyi n. sp., P. escobarae n. sp., P. ferruginea (Gallardo, 1968) n. comb., P. g l a b r a (Treadwell, 1901) n. comb., P. g l a s b y i n. sp., P. gracilis (Hartman, 1961) n. comb., and P. talehsapensis (Fauvel, 1932) n. comb. On the other hand, P. f e rnandense Augener, 1918, described from two localities in Ghana and in Equatorial Guinea, has anchylosed neurohooks in posterior chaetigers and therefore must be referred to Trophoniella .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D2F2633FF44FD7E64E0FA0F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D2F2630FF44F9996292FEF0.text	D34C87B84D2F2630FF44F9996292FEF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma Grube 1877	<div><p>Key to species of Pycnoderma Grube, 1877</p><p>1 Tunic with few or no sediment grains; posterior neurospines entire............................................. 2</p><p>- Tunic covered by small sediment grains; posterior neurospines bifid, or bidentate.................................. 7</p><p>2(1) Tunic hyaline; chaetiger 1 with neurochaetae close to notochaetae; papillae thin, sparse, body rugose................... 3</p><p>- Tunic opaque; chaetiger 1 with neurochaetae clearly separated from notochaetae, as a lateral fan; papillae abundant, body pilose or pubescent.................................................................................... 4</p><p>3(2) Chaetigers 1–7 long, smooth; with three rows of elongate papillae................................... P. dannyi n. sp.</p><p>- Chaetigers 1–7 not markedly longer than following ones; with 6–8 irregular rows of tiny papillae.. P. congoense Grube, 1877</p><p>4(2) Cephalic cage chaetae as long as first 11–14 chaetigers; median notochaetae with many long articles, each about 7 times longer than wide........................................................................................... 5</p><p>- Cephalic cage chaetae as long as first 7–8 chaetigers......................................................... 6</p><p>5(4) Neurochaetae with two articles........................................... P. ferruginea (Gallardo, 1968) n. comb.</p><p>- Neurochaetae with three articles, median one smaller........................................... P. escobarae n. sp.</p><p>6(4) Median notochaetae as long as body width..................................... P. glabra (Treadwell, 1901) n. comb.</p><p>- Median notochaetae as long as 1/3 body width............................... P. talehsapensis (Fauvel, 1932) n. comb.</p><p>7(1) First few chaetigers without dorsal lobes; sediment grains sparse, leaving wide tunic areas without sediment grains; first neurohooks from chaetiger 7; posterior neurospines bifid............................................... P. glasbyi n. sp.</p><p>- First few chaetigers with large dorsal lobes; sediment grains densely packed, completely covering the tunic; posterior neurospines bidentate.......................................................... P. gracilis (Hartman, 1961) n. comb.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D2F2630FF44F9996292FEF0	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D2C260EFF44FEDB6657FC8E.text	D34C87B84D2C260EFF44FEDB6657FC8E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma congoense Grube 1877	<div><p>Pycnoderma congoense Grube, 1877</p><p>Figure 13</p><p>Pycnoderma congoense Grube, 1877b:540 –541; Augener, 1918:451 –452, Pl. 6, Fig. 147, Text fig. 58 (redescr.); Monro, 1930:162 –163, Fig 65; Day, 1967:656, Figs. 32.1g –l; Intes &amp; leLoeuff, 1977:235; Hartwich, 1993:91.</p><p>Piromis congoense: Kirkegaard, 1996:64 .</p><p>Diplocirrus longisetosus: Rullier, 1964:1094 (non von Marenzeller, 1890).</p><p>Stylarioides congoense Kirkegaard, 1959:39 –40 (partim).</p><p>Stylarioides scutigeroides: Rullier, 1965:48 (non Augener, 1918).</p><p>Type material. Tropical Eastern Atlantic Ocean. Three syntypes (ZMB-856, ZMB-869, ZMB-Q4754), off Congo, R/V Gazelle, no further data (longest used for redescription; 869: anterior fragment, anteroventrally dissected, most chaetae broken, papillae eroded, breaking in two pieces, 91 mm long, 3.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 3 mm long, 92 chaetigers; thicker neurospines from chaetiger 12; 4754: anterior fragment, not dissected, most chaetae broken, papillae not eroded, 60 mm long, 3 mm wide, cephalic cage 4 mm long, 70 chaetigers; thicker neurospines from chaetiger 10, four neurochaetae by chaetiger 14).</p><p>Additional material. Tropical Eastern Atlantic Ocean. One slide (IRFA-W58) of D. longisetosus (from Rullier 1965, with several parapodia; resin collapsed but chaetae still visible). One specimen (IRFA), off Point-Noire, Congo (04°51ʹ S, 11°43ʹ E), 50 m, 12 Aug. 1963, A. Crosnier, coll. (fixed in alcohol, anterior fragment, previously dissected). One specimen (IRFA /2), off Point-Noire, Congo, 35–40 m, 30 Oct. 1963, A. Crosnier, coll. (complete). One specimen (MNHN-507a), WSW off Bibundi, Cameroun, Sta. 112 (04°08ʹ30ʺ N, 08°52ʹ35ʺ E), 25 m, Dec. 1962, A. Crosnier, coll. (id. as D. longisetosus; partly dehydrated specimen, complete, damaged; most cephalic cage and body chaetae lost. Neurospines from chaetiger 5). One specimen (MNHN-507b) breaking into three parts, many neurochaetae broken off, off Benin, St. 3, 48 m, gray sand, 8 Oct. 1963, A. Crosnier, coll. (id. as S. scutigeroides). One specimen (ZMUC-1797), off Nigeria, R/V Atlantide, Sta. 103 (04°38ʹ N, 05°19ʹ E), 40 m, 17 Feb. 1946 (anterior fragment; first neurospines in chaetiger 10). One specimen (ZMUC-1798), off Lobito, Angola, R/V Galathea, Sta. 124 (12°20ʹ S, 13°40ʹ E), 45 m, 20 Dec. 1950 (anterior fragment; first neurospines in chaetiger 12). One specimen (ZMUC-1799), off Lobito, Angola, R/V Galathea, Sta. 125 (12°20ʹ S, 13°40ʹ E), 60 m, 20 Dec. 1950 (anterior fragment; first neurospines in chaetiger 12).</p><p>Description. Largest syntype (ZMB-856) pale brown; anterior fragment, slightly damaged, anteriorly collapsed, breaking into four fragments. Body cylindrical, anteriorly swollen, tapering medially and posteriorly (Fig. 13 A); tunic papillated, first few chaetigers with tough cuticle, papillae eroded; with fine adhering sediment particles, barely visible, giving body a naked dorsal surface (Fig. 13 B, D), as well as laterally (Fig. 13 C); papillae minute, clavate, abundant, but most eroded, slightly longer on chaetal lobes. Syntype 100 mm long, 2.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 3 mm long (neurochaetae; notochaetae lost), 83 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end not exposed, observed in an already dissected syntype (ZMB-869). Cephalic hood tube short; margin finely papillated. Prostomium low; with four small, dark eyes (confirmed in IRFA specimens, Fig. 13 E). Caruncle extending to branchial plate margin, wider basally, tapering distally, slightly elevated. Palps pale, corrugated; palp keels triangular, small. Lips damaged during dissection. Branchiae all thin, cirriform, maculated, arising on a tongue-like protuberance; filaments arranged in two lateral groups, each with filaments in rows, of about 100 filaments. Most branchial filaments of similar length, about as long as palps. Nephridial lobes not seen.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae slightly longer than body width; only chaetiger 1 involved in the cephalic cage, following chaetigers with elongate chaetae but shorter than those present in chaetiger 1. Cephalic cage chaetae arranged in short dorsolateral row, noto- and neurochaetae close to each other; each with four chaetae per bundle.</p><p>Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 smooth. Anterior chaetigers without especially long papillae. Chaetigers 1–3 of similar length, wider than long. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae gradual, thicker neurospines with long articles completely replace capillaries by chaetiger 16. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia lateral, poorly developed, with chaetae emerging from the body wall; anterior 4–5 parapodia forming short, petaloid, anteriorly directed lobe. Medial neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia each with a row of 4–6 clavate, elongate postchaetal papillae, diminishing in size posteriorly.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in short transverse row, 8–10 per fascicle, as long as 1/3 body width; posterior notochaetae darker, thicker; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with short articles basally, slightly longer medially and distally (Fig. 13 F); neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, gradually replaced by aristate neurospines from chaetiger 10; by chaetiger 16 only aristate neurospines (Fig. 13 G); arranged in a short transverse row, 6–7 per fascicle. Following chaetigers with aristate neurospines, with progressively fewer, longer articles (Fig. 13 H), then articles reduced in number (Fig. 13 I, J), and a single, short article present before distal, multiarticulate, dehiscent arista. Each aristate neurospine darker basally and medially, less pigmented distally.</p><p>Posterior end unknown.</p><p>Variation. The anterior chaetigers are darker or redder than the remainder of the body. This pigmentation is probably due to the adhered sediment particles since it is restricted to the outer tunic layer.</p><p>Remarks. Pycnoderma congoense Grube, 1877, resembles P. dannyi n. sp. (see below) by having a transparent, sediment-free tunic; the two species differ markedly, however, in the relative length of anterior chaetigers and in the relative abundance of papillae over the whole body. In P. congoense, anterior chaetigers are short and the body has 6–8 rows of small, delicate papillae, while in P. dannyi n. sp., the anterior chaetigers are longer with about three rows of larger papillae.</p><p>Distribution. Originally described from Congo, the species ranges along tropical Western Africa, in shallow water (20–60 m).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D2C260EFF44FEDB6657FC8E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D12260CFF44FC066276FC15.text	D34C87B84D12260CFF44FC066276FC15.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma dannyi	<div><p>Pycnoderma dannyi n. sp.</p><p>Figure 14</p><p>Stylarioides congoense: Fauvel, 1939:17 –18 (partim); Kirkegaard, 1959:39 –40 (partim).</p><p>Type material. Tropical Eastern Atlantic Ocean. Holotype (ZMUC-1782), off Port Marshall, Liberia, R/V Atlantide Sta. CII-1 (53 in publication), 12 m, 7 Jan. 1946, J.B. Kirkegaard, coll. One paratype (ZMUC-1783), Guinea Bay, off Northwestern Angola, R/V Galathea, Sta. 86 (06°19.3ʹ S, 12°06.5ʹ E), 40 m, 8 Dec. 1950.</p><p>Additional material. One specimen (IRFA), off Kipundji, Congo, 25 m, 26 Aug. 1965, A. Crosnier, coll. (mature female, anterior fragment, broken into two pieces, fixed in alcohol, some parapodia previously removed; chaetigers 2–6 very long, pale, chaetigers 4–5 with anterior margin projected over the previous segment; 3–4 irregular rows of elongate capitate papillae per segment).</p><p>Description. Holotype incomplete, broken into two fragments; body mostly pale-brown, chaetigers 1–6 pale yellow. Body cylindrical (Fig. 14 A), slightly tapering posteriorly; tunic papillated, free from sediment cover. Papillae reduced in first few chaetigers (Fig. 14 B–D); most of body with long, capitates papillae, arranged in 3–4 bands per segment (Fig. 14 E). Holotype 54 mm long, 5 mm wide, cephalic cage 4 mm long, 70 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end not exposed; not dissected to avoid damage. Cephalic cage chaetae as long as 4/5 body width. Chaetiger 1 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetiger 2 with chaetae longer than following chaetigers, but not contributing to cage; chaetiger 1 with chaetae arranged in short dorsolateral row, neurochaetal lobe almost fused to notochaetal lobe; about 12 notochaetae and eight neurochaetae per bundle.</p><p>Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 finely papillated, not projecting anteriorly (Fig. 14 B, D). Chaetigers 1–6 mostly smooth, without long papillae; two tiny papillae in transverse depressions slightly ahead of, and behind notopodial lobes. Chaetigers 1–3 becoming progressively longer up to chaetiger 6; chaetiger 7 shortest, then following segments of similar length, wider than long, more papillose. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; neurohooks start in chaetiger 8. Gonopodial lobes not seen (Fig. 14 C).</p><p>Parapodia well developed, lateral (Fig. 14 E, F); median neuropodia ventrolateral. Notopodia low, rounded lobes without suprachaetal papillae; infrachaetal papillae very long, capitate, 4–6 in a row, directed ventrally (6–8 in posterior chaetigers). Neuropodia low, rounded lobes with 4–5 slightly smaller suprachaetal papillae (2–4 in posterior chaetigers), and 3–4 infrachaetal papillae (1–2 in posterior chaetigers), smaller than the superior ones.</p><p>Median notochaetae long, arranged in short transverse row, 6–8 notochaetae per bundle, as long as 1/2 body width; notochaetae of chaetigers 1–6 multiarticulated capillaries, articles short medially, shorter distally; other notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with long articles basally and medially, distally hyaline, articles short along large chaetal proportion (Fig. 14 G). Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–6; falcate neurohooks from chaetiger 7, arranged in transverse row, anterior chaetigers with five per fascicle, up to seven in posterior chaetigers. Neurohooks brown, oligo-articulate, aristate, most eroded or broken distally (Fig. 14 H); articles short basally, become longer medially, distally very long.</p><p>Posterior end unknown.</p><p>Etymology. This species is named after Danny Eibye-Jacobsen for his many contributions to polychaete systematics, and especially because of his interest in promoting the study of polychaetes in his country and abroad. The latter has resulted in being involved as editor and author of an impressive contribution to our knowledge of Northeastern Indian Ocean polychaetes.</p><p>Type locality. off Port Marshall, Liberia, 12 m depth.</p><p>Variation. The paratype is an anterior fragment, 35.5 mm long, 1.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 3 mm long, 43 chaetigers; first neurohooks from chaetiger 7.</p><p>Remarks. Pycnoderma dannyi n. sp. is closely allied to P. congoense; the two species differ because P. dannyi n. sp. has longer anterior chaetigers, an earlier start of the neurohooks, and fewer rows of large, capitate papillae along the body. Fauvel (1939) noticed some differences between his specimen and the published accounts of P. congoense, especially concerning the type of neurochaetae; he found some neurohooks in his specimen. Further, he noticed that the neurohooks began on chaetiger 7, and that there were larger papillae associated with the chaetal bundles. These observations were confirmed by Kirkegaard (1959). Consequently, their materials are herein regarded as a distinct species, and these features are regarded as diagnostic for P. dannyi .</p><p>Distribution. Western Tropical Africa, from Gambia to Northwestern Angola, in shallow water (12–40 m).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D12260CFF44FC066276FC15	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D10260DFF44FBB5668BFA32.text	D34C87B84D10260DFF44FBB5668BFA32.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma escobarae	<div><p>Pycnoderma escobarae n. sp.</p><p>Figure 15</p><p>Type material. Western Gulf of Mexico. Holotype (ECOSUR-103), R/V Justo Sierra Cruise Sigsbee 2, Sta. 22 (21°12.110ʹ N, 96°56.029ʹ W), off Tuxpan, Veracruz, Mexico, 246 m, muddy sand, 30 Jun. 1999, E. Escobar, coll.</p><p>Description. Holotype incomplete, without posterior end, anteriorly blunt, cylindrical, with some irregular constrictions towards anterior end, several chaetae broken (Fig. 15 A); anterior third of body golden, yellowish, with some tiny dark particles, rest of body pale; tunic finely papillated. Body papillae small, thin, cirriform, covering body, mostly eroded, arranged along body in several transverse rows; larger papillae subchaetal in notopodial and neuropodia. Holotype 28 mm long, 1 mm wide, cephalic cage 1.3 mm long, 67 chaetigers.</p><p>Details of anterior end unknown. Cephalic cage chaetae broken (Fig. 15 B), one left slightly longer than body width. Only chaetiger 1 involved in cephalic cage, notochaetae in chaetiger 2 not more than twice as long as those in following chaetigers. Cephalic cage notochaetae in short dorsolateral row; neurochaetae in short lateral row; 1–2 noto- and 3–4 neurochaetae per bundle, longest neurochaetae about 1/3 as long as notochaetae. Anterior dorsal margin of first chaetiger short, papillae eroded. Anterior chaetigers without especially long papillae. Chaetigers 1– 3 of similar length, second parapodia displaced dorsally. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; multiarticulate neurohooks from chaetiger 2; oligo-articulate neurohooks beginning from chaetiger 16, mostly broken. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia poorly developed, lateral. Median neuropodia ventrolateral. Notopodia long, thin lobes, each usually with two long, capitates, infrachaetal papillae, superior one larger. Neuropodia long lobes, each with single infrachaetal papilla, smaller than notochaetal papillae.</p><p>Median notochaetae in transverse row, 1–2 per bundle (3–4 in posterior chaetigers), 1/2–1/3 as long as body width (posterior notochaetae 1.5 times as long as body width); all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with very long articles basally, slightly decreasing in size medially and distally (Fig. 15 E, F). Neurochaetae multiarticulate in chaetigers 2–15 (Fig. 15 D), oligo-articulate in following chaetigers, arranged in a transverse row. Neurohooks from chaetiger 16, 3–4 per bundle, each with anchylosed, short articles, and two longer articles (Fig. 15 E); blade long, lanceolate, aristate (Fig. 15 G).</p><p>Posterior region tapering (Fig. 15 C); pygidium unknown.</p><p>Etymology. This species is named after Dr. Elva Escobar, a Mexican deep-sea biologist who has coordinated several scientific cruises in the Gulf of Mexico, and because during one of those studies, this interesting specimen was found.</p><p>Remarks. Pycnoderma escobarae n. sp. resembles P. ferruginea (Gallardo, 1968) n. comb. (see below). Both species have an opaque tunic with papillae and notochaetae with very long articles. They differ mainly because in P. escobarae n. sp., papillae are shorter and less abundant, while they are longer and more abundant in P. ferruginea; further, P. escobarae n. sp. has less notochaetae per bundle (3–4), while P. ferruginea has twice as many notochaetae per bundle; the two species also differ in the relative number of articles per neurospine. Thus, P. e s c o - barae n. sp. has three articles and a smaller median one while P. ferruginea has only two articles.</p><p>Type locality. Off Tuxpan, Veracruz, Mexico, in muddy sands at about 250 m depth.</p><p>Distribution. Only known from the type locality in the Southwestern Gulf of Mexico, in muddy sands at moderate depths (246 m).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D10260DFF44FBB5668BFA32	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D11260BFF44F99D63A5FB85.text	D34C87B84D11260BFF44F99D63A5FB85.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma ferruginea (Gallardo 1968) Gallardo 1968	<div><p>Pycnoderma ferruginea (Gallardo, 1968) n. comb.</p><p>Figure 16</p><p>Brada ferruginea Gallardo, 1968:107 –108, Pl. 49, Figs. 5–6.</p><p>Piromis congoensis Gallardo, 1968:109 –110, Pl. 51, Figs. 1–7 (non Grube, 1877).</p><p>Type material. Western Tropical Pacific. Holotype of Brada ferruginea Gallardo, 1968 (LACM-AHF -312), off West side of Hon Lon Island, Bay of Nha Trang, Viet Nam, Naga Expediton, R/V Mao Tien, Sta. 117 (12°11ʹ21ʺ N, 109°16ʹ15ʺ E), 12 m, 10 Feb. 1960, V.A. Gallardo, coll.</p><p>Additional material. Western Tropical Pacific. One mature female (LACM-AHF-2515), broken in two pieces, 4 km N Hon Ho island, Viet Nam, Naga Expediton, R/V Mao Tien, Sta. 153I (12°19ʹ20ʺ N, 109°21ʹ40ʺ E), 43 m, mud, 24 Feb. 1960 (cephalic cage chaetae length equivalent to the anterior end up to chaetiger 18). Anterior fragment (LACM-AHF-2516), 2 km NW Hon Ho Island, Bay of Nha Trang, Viet Nam, Naga Expedition, R/V Mao Tien, Sta. 15411 (12°18ʹ0 6ʺ N, 109°21ʹ27ʺ E), 43 m, mud, 24 Feb. 1960, V.A. Gallardo, coll. (cephalic cage chaetae length equivalent to the anterior end up to chaetiger 14).</p><p>Description. Holotype (LACM-AHF-312) broken into three parts, anterior fragment reddish, especially anteriorly, with most chaetae directed forward, median and posterior fragments pale (Fig. 16 A), all cylindrical; tunic thin, densely papillated, fine red sediment particles anteriorly; papillae mostly small, thin, cirriform, abundant all over the body, and few longer, capitate, isolated, along body in 2–3 regular rows, and others close to parapodia. Holotype 46(15+4+27) mm long, 2.5 mm wide, cephalic cage 5.5 mm long, 65(28+7+30) chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic hood partially exposed in holotype, short, margin papillated. Anterior end observed in another specimen (LACM-AHF-11153); cephalic hood very short, margin papillated. Prostomium depressed, eyes not visible; caruncle short, not reaching posterior margin of branchial plate (Fig. 16 E), lateral ridges short, prominent, extending towards lateral bases of branchiae. Palps lost; palp keels rounded. Lateral lips wide, well-developed; dorsal and ventral lips reduced. Branchiae mostly lost, cirriform, pale (LACM-AHF-11154), sessile on branchial plate, widely separated medially into two groups, over a tongue-like protuberance, branchial groups posteriorly coalescent, with about 100 filaments per side. Size relationships between palps and branchiae unknown.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae more than twice as long as body width (Fig. 16 B). Only chaetiger 1 involved in cephalic cage, notochaetae of chaetiger 2 less than twice as long as following ones. Cephalic cage notochaetae arranged in a short dorsal row, neurochaetae as a long lateral row (Fig. 16 D); 8–10 notochaetae and 12–15 neurochaetae per bundle, longest about 1/4 as long as notochaetae. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 short, papillated (Fig. 16 C). Anterior chaetigers without long papillae. Chaetigers 1–3 decreasing in size anterior to posterior, second parapodia displaced dorsally. Post-cephalic cage chaetigers not elongated; a white rounded dorsal spot present on posterior margin of chaetiger 1. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae gradual; compound neurohooks from chaetiger 16. Gonopodial lobes in chaetiger 5, low, pale, rounded.</p><p>Parapodia poorly developed, lateral. Median neuropodia lateral. Notopodia low, thin lobes, with 3–4 long capitate papillae. Neuropodia slightly longer lobes, with some superior and inferior long capitate papillae.</p><p>Median notochaetae in short transverse row, 6–8 per bundle, 3/5 as long as body width, posterior notochaetae twice as long as body width; notochaetae all multiarticulated capillaries with very long articles (Fig. 16 F), continuing to tip. Neurochaetae similar to notochaetae in anterior chaetigers, arranged in transverse row. Neurohooks from chaetiger 16, 6–8 per bundle, each with feebly marked, anchylosed short articles basally, followed by 2–5 long articles, with long, lanceolate, aristate blade (Fig. 16 F).</p><p>Posterior end unknown.</p><p>Remarks. Pycnoderma ferruginea (Gallardo, 1968) n. comb. was placed in the genus Brada because of the presence of ventral lobes in chaetiger 5. However, the cephalic cage, the body shape, and the type of neurochaetae are very different from those of Brada, and this species is therefore here referred to Pycnoderma, and hence the new combination: P. ferruginea (Gallardo, 1968) .</p><p>The description of B. talehsapensis by Fauvel (1932) and its redescription (Fauvel 1953) were not overlooked by Gallardo (1968), but he confused the species when comparing his specimens to Fauvel’s species, which is a close relative. The two species differ in the relative size of the cephalic cage and in the pigmentation pattern of the branchial filaments. In B. ferruginea, chaetal length of the holotype is about the same over the first 13 chaetigers; this relative size of cephalic cage chaetae is confirmed in two other specimens being 1 mm wide, which have these chaetae being as long as reaching chaetigers 12 or 17. In contrast, in B. talehsapensis the cephalic cage chaetae are shorter, with their length being about the same as the length of the anterior end up to chaetiger 7. Further, the branchial filaments are homogeneously pale in P. ferruginea whereas they are banded in P. talehsapensis .</p><p>These two species were included in Brada by Fauvel, because they have on the fifth chaetiger “… the nephridial papillae characteristic of the genus Brada ʺ (Fauvel 1932:185). Four paragraphs above, however, he indicated that its “… general appearance is rather unusual for the genus, the body being generally short with few segments, whilst in this species it is long, vermiform and has numerous segments.ʺ</p><p>On the other hand, P. ferruginea resembles P. escobarae n. sp. (see above). Both species have opaque tunics with papillae and notochaetae with very long articles. They differ because P. ferruginea has twice as many notochaetae, the body is more papillose, and the papillae are longer. They also differ in the relative number of articles per neurospine because in P. ferruginea there are only two articles whereas in P. escobarae, neurospines have mostly three articles with a smaller median one. In addition, these two species occur in different oceans and water depths.</p><p>Distribution. Restricted to the Gulf of Nha Trang, Vietnam, in shallow water (12–30 m).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D11260BFF44F99D63A5FB85	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D172608FF44FB056395F9FC.text	D34C87B84D172608FF44FB056395F9FC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma glabra (Treadwell 1901) Treadwell 1901	<div><p>Pycnoderma glabra (Treadwell, 1901) n. comb.</p><p>Figure 17</p><p>Stylarioides glabra Treadwell, 1901:208, Figs. 73–75; Treadwell, 1939:279 –280, Fig. 95.</p><p>Type material. Caribbean Sea. Holotype of Stylariodes glabra Treadwell, 1901 (USNM 16162), Mayaguez Harbor, Punta del Algarrobo, R/V Fish Hawk 1898–99 Sta. (138) 6066, 16–17 fathoms.</p><p>Description. Holotype (USNM 16162) damaged, almost without chaetae; anterior end dissected (Fig. 17 A). Body cylindrical, tapering posteriorly; individual papillae small, of about same size dorsally and ventrally, each with fine brown-red sediment making brown spherules, arranged in about ten transverse rows in median segments (Fig. 17 B). Tunic in posterior chaetigers forming a crust (Fig. 17 C). Below the tunic, dorsal surface with two large papillae per segment. Holotype 26 mm long, 1 mm wide, cephalic cage 2 mm long, 43 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end not exposed, torn away when the outer cover was removed, as stated in the original description (a label indicates the anterior end was loose in the bottle; now lost).</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae twice as long as body width. Chaetigers 1–2 involved in the cephalic cage; notochaetae of chaetigers 3–4 directed forward, but chaetal size relationships unknown due to being broken. Cephalic chaetae in short row, about five per ramus.</p><p>Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with median triangular projection; other details probably damaged or lost during the original tunic removal. First two chaetigers without long papillae (probably lost); one pair of larger papillae per segment, arranged in two longitudinal rows along body. Post-cephalic cage chaetigers not elongated. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; large ventral hooks from chaetiger 2. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia better developed on chaetigers 1–5(6). Noto- and neuropodia positioned on body corners. Notopodia provided with three long postchaetal papillae and about five long multiarticulated capillaries.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in short transverse row; 3–4 per ramus, as long as ½ body width, longer in posterior chaetigers; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, articles small basally, longer medially and distally (Fig. 17 D). Median neuropodia ventrolateral. Neuropodia less developed than notopodia; with no papillae observed. Neurochaetae broken, multiarticulated (bidentate?) hooks from chaetiger 2, arranged in transverse row, 4–5 per bundle, each with shorter articles basally, larger ones medially and distally (Fig. 17 E). All neurohooks broken, start, number, extension of short articles and tips unknown.</p><p>Posterior end lost, terminal part regenerating.</p><p>Remarks. The specimen is severely damaged; the anterior end was eroded by the removal of the outer cover and the dissection that permitted the observation of the anterior end (now lost). Despite its preservation state, the median chaetigers show the bases of multiarticulate neurochaetae but the lack of the posterior region does not allow for a precise indication of the start of the anchylosed neurohooks. Consequently, its placement in Pycnoderma is provisional based on its general resemblance to two other species, rather than anything diagnostic. The anterior end was illustrated by Treadwell (1901, Fig. 74), but was confused with the pharynx; later (Treadwell 1939), the structure was correctly regarded as a palp.</p><p>Pycnoderma glabra (Treadwell, 1901) n. comb., is closely allied with P. talehsapensis (Fauvel, 1932) n. comb., since both have cephalic cage chaetae as long as the first 7–8 chaetigers. They differ basically in the relative length of median notochaetae, being about as long as body width in P. gl a br a while they are about 1/3 body width in P. talehsapensis .</p><p>Distribution. Restricted to the type locality, Mayaguez, Puerto Rico, in 16–17 fathoms.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D172608FF44FB056395F9FC	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D142606FF44F92B64F4FEED.text	D34C87B84D142606FF44F92B64F4FEED.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma glasbyi	<div><p>Pycnoderma glasbyi n. sp.</p><p>Figure 18</p><p>Type material. Eastern Indian Ocean, Timor Sea. Holotype (NTM-18917), Sta. DW197A (12°28.25ʹ S, 130°50.32ʹ E), Darwin Harbor, Australia, 2 m, Mar. Ecol. Unit, coll.</p><p>Description. Holotype (NTM-18917), complete, broken into two pieces (Fig. 18 A), slightly damaged. Body brown-yellowish anteriorly, paler posteriorly, cylindrical, tapering towards both ends, slightly swollen posteriorly; tunic scarcely papillated, with a thick tunic adhering fine sediment particles, especially in anterior body half; papillae arranged in longitudinal rows, four dorsally, two ventrally. Holotype 46 (29+17) mm long, 2.5 mm wide (posterior swollen region 2 mm wide), cephalic cage 2 mm long, 68 (42+26) chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic hood not exposed (Fig. 18 B); not dissected to avoid further damage. Cephalic cage chaetae shorter than body width. Chaetigers 1–3 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in short lateral rows, with 4–5 chaetae per bundle. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 papillated. Chaetigers 1–3 becoming slightly longer posteriorly. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae abrupt; aristate neurospines from chaetiger 7. Gonopodial lobes not projected; with transverse depression along neurochaetal lobe.</p><p>Parapodia poorly developed; chaetae emerging from the body wall. Parapodia lateral; median neuropodia ventrolateral. Noto- and neuropodia long lobes, each with one suprachaetal, one infrachaetal and another papillae inferior to the latter, especially in anterior chaetigers; posterior chaetal lobes each with a single infrachaetal and one interramal papilla.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in short transverse row, 5–6 per bundle, about as long as 2/5 body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, dark yellow, with short articles basally and medially, medium-sized distally (Fig. 18 C). Neurochaetae multiarticulated capillaries in chaetigers 1–4 (Fig. 18 D); aristate neurospines from chaetiger 5, arranged in transverse row, 4–5 per ramus; neurospines become distally foliose, bifid from chaetiger 18 (Fig. 18 E). Each neurospine dark yellow, with short articles basally and medially, distally yellow, hyaline, aristate, bifurcate.</p><p>Posterior end subdistally swollen; pygidium a short cone; anus terminal, no anal cirri.</p><p>Etymology. This species is named after my good friend and colleague, Christopher Glasby, who has been working on Australian polychaetes in general, by providing the type specimen, and because he has been extremely helpful with my research activities for many years.</p><p>Remarks. Pycnoderma glasbyi n. sp. is unique by having median and posterior neurospines distally foliose and bifid. The species resembles P. gracilis (Hartman, 1961) n. comb. because both have a sediment cover with small grains. They differ in the relative development of the dorsal lobes and the relative density of adhering sediment grains. In P. glasbyi n. sp. there are no dorsal lobes and the sediment particles are sparse, while in P. gracilis there are dorsal lobes and the sediment particles are densely packed. There is at least another species in Australia having abundant sediment grains on the tunic (ZMUC POL-2110). The only specimen available is a damaged anterior fragment, dredged in 8 m in Eden Bay, NSW. Additional specimens are needed in order to make a full description.</p><p>Type locality. Darwin Harbor, Northern Territory, Australia.</p><p>Distribution. Only known from the type locality, in shallow water (2 m).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D142606FF44F92B64F4FEED	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D1A2607FF44FE3D6686FE26.text	D34C87B84D1A2607FF44FE3D6686FE26.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma gracilis (Hartman 1961) Hartman 1961	<div><p>Pycnoderma gracilis (Hartman, 1961) n. comb.</p><p>Figure 19</p><p>Piromis gracilis Hartman, 1961:123 –124, Pl. 29, Figs. 1–4, Pl. 30, Figs. 1–9 (partim).</p><p>Material examined. Eastern Tropical Pacific. Holotype (LACM-AHF-529) and paratype (LACM-AHF-530), off San Jose Light, Guatemala, R/V Velero III, Sta. 930 (13°52ʹ35ʺ N, 91°01ʹ0 2ʺ W), 12–13 fathoms, 23 Mar. 1939.</p><p>Additional material. One almost complete specimen (LACM-AHF-2517), R/V Velero I II, Sta. 216 (00°35ʹ50ʺ N, 80°07ʹ0 0ʺ W), San Francisco Bay, Ecuador, 20 fathoms, 11 Feb. 1934. Anterior fragment (LACM-AHF-2518), R/V Velero III, Sta. 930 (13°52ʹ35ʺ N, 91°01ʹ0 2ʺ W), off San Jose Light, Guatemala, 12–13 fathoms, fine black sand, 23 Mar. 1939. Four specimens (MCZ-55893, three; MCZ-55984, one), Gulf of Nicoya Benthic Survey, Sta. 24 (09°49ʹ25ʺ N, 84°41ʹ20ʺ W), 11 m, 1 Oct. 1980, H. Dean, coll.</p><p>Description. Holotype an anterior fragment (Fig. 19 A), laterally dissected previously; body cylindrical, slightly tapering posteriorly. Tunic thick, papillated, with many sediment particles; papillae long in anterior chaetigers, notopodial ones making large, truncate, conical lobes directed forwards (Fig. 19 B). Dorsum and venter with two longitudinal rows of long papillae, protruding through tunic, not forming large lobes. Holotype 20 mm long, 3 mm wide, cephalic cage 3 mm long, 29 chaetigers.</p><p>Anterior end not exposed, previously dissected (Fig. 19 D). Prostomium low cone, eyes small, dark brown. Caruncle long, well-developed, separating branchial lobes. Palps long, darker dorsally, palp keels rounded. Branchiae cirriform, distally dark, arising from tongue-like protuberance, with over 80 filaments per side. Some branchiae longer, others shorter, or as long as palps.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae as long as body width. Chaetigers 1–4 involved in the cephalic cage; chaetae arranged in a short row, chaetal fascicles dorso- and ventrolateral with 7–8 noto- and 5–6 neurochaetae per bundle. Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 with median trifid lobe, projecting anteriorly. Anterior chaetigers with long notopodial lobes, no large median papillae involved. Chaetigers 1–3 of similar size, notopodial lobes larger in chaetiger 3. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae gradual; bifid neurohooks from chaetiger 28, inconspicuous. Gonopodial lobes not seen.</p><p>Parapodia well developed, especially in anterior chaetigers, positioned at body corners. Median neuropodia ventrolateral. Notopodia with several long, cirriform, capitate papillae; papilla of anterior chaetigers forming large dorsal lobe, in median chaetigers forming postchaetal fans each with 4–5 papillae, intermediate papillae longer. Neuropodia smaller, with similar postchaetal papillae, in a fan with 3–4 papillae.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in longitudinal row, as lateral fan with 8–10 chaetae per bundle, each chaeta 1/3 as long as body width; all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries with short articles basally and distally, long articles medially (Fig. 19 F). Neurochaetae multiarticulated hooks in two sizes, longer in anterior chaetigers (Fig. 19 G), shorter, bifid ones from chaetiger 28 (Fig. 19 H), mostly with broken tips, arranged in transverse row, directed forward in holotype, six per bundle, three of each size group, continued to end of body (Fig. 19 I).</p><p>Holotype without posterior end (Fig. 19 A, C); one paratype complete, posterior end conical, anus terminal (Fig. 19 E), without anal cirri.</p><p>Variation. One complete specimen (Sta. 216) has variable segment length: chaetigers 1–12 are medium sized, chaetigers 13–28 are short, and thereafter are elongated (or badly preserved) from chaetiger 28. One of the specimens that was included in the original description (station 767) does not belong to this species; it has straight neurohooks with very short anchylosed articles throughout the body, and three longitudinal series of black papillae; it is an undescribed species of Trophoniella .</p><p>Remarks. As stated above, Piromis includes only species with bifid multiarticulated neurohooks. After an examination of different specimens from the type locality, it was determined that because of the presence of neurohooks with few or very few articles in posterior chaetigers, Piromis gracilis does not belong in the genus Piromis . These specimens are extremely similar to the holotype and are regarded as conspecific; further, because they have neurohooks with a single long article in posterior chaetigers, consequently, the species has been transferred to Pycnoderma .</p><p>Pycnoderma gracilis (Hartman, 1961) n. comb. resembles P. glasbyi n. sp. (see above) because both have their body covered by small sediment particles. They differ because P. gracilis has dorsal lobes along a few anterior chaetigers, the sediment particles are densely packed, and the posterior neurospines are bidentate, whereas P. glasbyi n. sp. lacks dorsal lobes, the sediment particles are sparse and the posterior neurospines are bifid.</p><p>Distribution. The type material comes from two localities in the Eastern Tropical Pacific, from Guatemala and Ecuador, in 20– 40 m.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D1A2607FF44FE3D6686FE26	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
D34C87B84D1B2602FF44F91B6459FA4E.text	D34C87B84D1B2602FF44F91B6459FA4E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pycnoderma talehsapensis (Fauvel 1932) Fauvel 1932	<div><p>Pycnoderma talehsapensis (Fauvel, 1932) n. comb.</p><p>Figure 20</p><p>Brada talehsapensis Fauvel, 1932:184 –185, Pl. 7, Fig. 17, Text fig. 32; Fauvel, 1953:351 –352, Figs. 183a–d;? Kirkegaard, 1996:63.</p><p>Type material. Western Tropical Pacific, South China Sea, Thailand. One slide (IRFA-R30), with several parapodia from Brada talehsapensis Fauvel, 1932, Sta. 30, Songkhla Lagoon (formerly known as Taleh-Sap), Thailand, N. Annandale coll.</p><p>Additional material. Western Tropical Pacific, Hainan Island, China. One specimen (SMF-15345), anterior fragment, Sanya Bay, Sta. B92-18B-13, dredge, 6 m, 25 Mar. 1992, R. Sun coll. One specimen (SMF-15346), anterior fragment, Sanya Bay, Sta. B92-17B-12, dredge, 6 m, 25 Mar. 1992, R. Sun coll. Indonesia. One anterior fragment (MZB-7) broken in two, Sta. NT2A (04°03.02ʹ N, 108°26.48ʹ E), Natuna Timur, 60 m, 29 Jul. 2001, I. Al Hakin coll. (cephalic cage about as long as reaching chaetiger 5(–6)). One anterior fragment (MZB-19), Sta. NT3A (04°06.62ʹ N, 108°23.48ʹ E), Natuna Timur, 64 m, 29 Jul. 2001, I. Al Hakin, coll. (cephalic cage about as long as reaching chaetiger 5). Two complete specimens (MZB-58), slightly damaged, Sta. NT8A (04°17.01ʹ N, 108°19.00ʹ E), Natuna Timur, 71 m, 30 Jul. 2001, I. Al Hakin, coll. (cephalic cage about as long as reaching chaetiger 5). One complete specimen (MZB-105), Sta. NB18A (03°40.28ʹ N, 107°56.00ʹ E), Natuna Barat, 56 m, 3 Aug. 2001, I. Al Hakin coll. (cephalic cage about as long as reaching chaetiger 5). One complete specimen (MZB-112), Sta. NB18B (03°40.28ʹ N, 107°56.00ʹ E), Natuna Barat, 56 m, 3 Aug. 2001, I. Al Hakin, coll. (cephalic cage about as long as reaching chaetiger 6). One anterior fragment (NTM-18472), Sta. NT2A (04°03.02ʹ N, 108°26.48ʹ E), East Natuna, 60 m, 29 Jul. 2001, I. Al Hakin, coll. (cephalic cage about as long as reaching chaetiger 6). One complete specimen (NTM-18620), Sta. NB17A (03°44.82ʹ N, 107°58.76ʹ E), West Natuna, 48 m, 3 Aug. 2001, I. Al Hakin coll. (used for description). One complete specimen (ZRC-418), Sta. NT7B (04°14.02ʹ N, 108°14.02ʹ E), Natuna Timur, 66 m, 30 Jul. 2001, I. Al Hakin, coll. (cephalic cage about as long as reaching chaetiger 5 chaetigers). Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea. One specimen (LACM-AHF-2519), anterior fragment, International Indian Ocean Expedition, R/V Anton Bruun, Sta. AB 201A (17º57ʹ N, 72º27ʹ E to 17º54ʹ N, 72º23ʹ E), 46–55 m, green mud and shells, 13 Nov. 1963. One specimen (LACM-AHF-2520), broken in two pieces, SW off Mumbai, W off Kelshi, Maharashtra, India, International Indian Ocean Expedition, Okah Point, Gulf of Kutch, Gujarat, India, R/V Anton Bruun, Sta. AB 222A (22º43ʹ N, 68º22ʹ E to 22º45ʹ N, 68º24ʹ E), 26–27 m, soft, sticky mud and clay, 18 Nov. 1963 (neurohooks from chaetiger 18). Bay of Bengal. Ninety-seven specimens (LACM-AHF-2521), juveniles, 53 complete, International Indian Ocean Expedition, Northern Indian Ocean, Stat RH 30, Madras, India, 2.5 km SE off harbor, directly east of the University building, 15 m, 18 Mar. 1964, H. Sanders coll. Persian Gulf. Four specimens (SMF- 15341), juveniles, Cruise GEOMAR 91, Sta. PG 1 KG, 1991, H. Zetsche coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 15). One specimen (SMF-15342), juvenile, Cruise GEOMAR 91, Sta. PG 27 KG, 1991, H. Zetsche, coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 15). Madagascar. Two specimens (SMF-15354), anterior fragments, some chaetae broken, Banc du Pracel, near Chesterfield Island, St. BP 25, 28 m, 11 Apr. 1970, R. Plante, coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 16–19). One specimen (SMF-15358), most tunic eroded, most papillae broken, Nosy Mitsio, Nosy Be, St. 1, 22 Jun. 1970, R. Plante coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 21). One specimen (SMF-15361), anterior fragment, Sud Nosy Iranja, St. 2/D, 37 m, 18 Nov. 1969, R. Plante coll. One specimen (SMF-15363), most body papillae eroded, Nord Mitsio, St. B / D, 8 May 1969, R. Plante coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 20). Three specimens (SMF-15366), two complete, body papillae variously eroded, Banc du Pracel, near Chesterfield Islands, St. BP 31, 22 m, 12 Apr. 1970, R. Plante coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 14–15). Ten specimens (SMF-15367), three complete, seven anterior fragments, Banc du Pracel, near Chesterfield Islands, St. BP 32, 33 m, 12 Apr. 1970, R. Plante coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 15–19). Two specimens (SMF-15368), anterior fragments, Nosy Mitsio, St. 1, 8 May 1969, R. Plante, coll. One specimen (SMF-15371), without posterior end, some chaetae broken, St. BP 29, 13 m, 12 Apr. 1970, R. Plante, coll. (first neurohooks from chaetiger 23). Eight specimens (SMF-15372), three anterior, five median or posterior fragments, body papillae variously eroded, Western Anfiky 2, St. 2, 30 m, 17 Apr. 1969, R. Plante coll. One specimen (SMF-15374), without posterior end, Nosy Iranja, Sta. 4, Benne, 17 Sep. 1966, R. Plante, coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 16). One specimen (SMF-15377), mature female, without posterior end, most body papillae eroded, B. Ambano, St. Bouee, 80 m, 7 Jun. 1969, R. Plante, coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 14; oocytes in chaetigers 5-11). One specimen (SMF-15378), juvenile without posterior end, Baie des Ambaro, St. Bouee, 20 m, 15 Feb. 1969, R. Plante, coll. (neurohooks from chaetiger 14).</p><p>Description. Complete specimen (NTM-18620) thin, rust-reddish anteriorly, darker in chaetigers 14–22, median and posterior segments pale (Fig. 20 A); tunic thin, finely papillated, fine sediment particles thinly covering body; papillae mostly small, thin, clavate, abundant all over body, some papillae longer, clavate in chaetal lobes. Specimen 17 mm long, 1 mm wide, cephalic cage 1 mm long, 59 chaetigers.</p><p>Cephalic hood not exposed, observed in two specimens (ZMB-58) with anterior end slightly exposed (Fig. 20 D, E); hood short with papillated margin. Prostomium low cone; eyes tiny, black. Palps pale, thick, smooth; palp keels reduced. Lateral lips wide, projected because of contraction, dorsal and ventral lips reduced.</p><p>Branchiae all cirriform, each filament dark-banded, swollen distally; arising from branchial plate, widely separated medially in two groups, over a tongue-like protuberance, branchial groups posteriorly coalescent, ten filaments per side. Branchiae of similar length, slightly longer than palps. Nephridial lobes colorless, shorter than branchiae.</p><p>Cephalic cage chaetae as long as body width (Fig. 20 B). Only chaetiger 1 involved in the cephalic cage. Chaetae arranged in short dorsal row (notochaetae) and short lateral row (neurochaetae); 6 noto- and 3–4 neurochaetae per bundle (all broken). Anterior dorsal margin of chaetiger 1 projected as small papillated cone. Anterior chaetigers without long papillae. Chaetigers 1–3 reduce in size posteriorly, with second parapodia displaced dorsally. Chaetal transition from cephalic cage to body chaetae gradual; compound neurohooks from chaetiger 15. Gonopodial lobes not visible.</p><p>Parapodia poorly developed, lateral. Median neuropodia lateral. Notopodia low rounded lobes, each with 2–3 clavate papillae (Fig. 20 F). Neuropodia low rounded lobes, with some superior and inferior long capitate papillae. Noto- and neuropodia with 1–2 interramal papillae.</p><p>Median notochaetae arranged in a short transverse row, 4–5 per bundle, 1/3 as long as body width (posterior notochaetae about as long as body width); all notochaetae multiarticulated capillaries, articles medium-sized basally, shorter medially, longer distally (Fig. 20 F); posterior notochaetae with very long articles medially, becoming shorter towards tip (Fig. 20 G). Neurochaetae similar to notochaetae in anterior chaetigers, arranged in transverse row. Neurohooks from chaetiger 15, 4–5 per bundle, each with anchylosed articles basally, then with 1–2 long articles, blade long, lanceolate, aristate (Fig. 20 H). Parapodia in slide IRFA-R30 has dried partly; soft body parts darkened, few anterior chaetae visible: notochaetae with long articles, neurochaetae with long articles, distally tapering but tips not visible.</p><p>Posterior end subdistally swollen (Fig. 20 C); pygidium regenerating, short truncated cone (slightly projected in other specimens), anus terminal, without anal cirri.</p><p>Variation. Complete specimens are shorter than the type materials; however, the cephalic cage length is conservative because in most specimens it was about as long as the length of the anterior end up to chaetiger 5(6). However, the number of neurochaetae seems to be size-dependent because the largest specimen (MZB-7) had about seven neurochaetae, whereas most other smaller specimens had only three or four, and the smallest specimen (ZRC-418) had only two. The fragility of neurochaetae might explain why Fauvel did not notice the remaining chaetal bases and described the species as lacking neurochaetae in chaetiger 1. Branchiae are banded and even if they are retracted, they can be seen by transparency of the body wall, as a sort of internal black dot. The start of neurohooks is difficult to determine precisely because they are brittle, but they appear to start around chaetiger 15.</p><p>Remarks. Pycnoderma talehsapensis (Fauvel, 1932) n. comb., differs from typical Brada species by having neurochaetae with very long, not anchylosed, articles as is the case in Brada . Pycnoderma talehsapensis differs from P. escobarae n. sp. and P. ferruginea especially in the relative length of the cephalic cage chaetae. Thus, they are shorter in P. talehsapensis while in both P. escobarae n. sp. and P. ferruginea they are much longer. Further, branchial filaments in P. talehsapensis are banded, whereas they are pale in P. ferruginea, and unknown in P. es c o - barae n. sp.</p><p>Distribution. Originally described from the Songkla Lagoon, Thailand, these specimens come from several localities in Indonesia, and the South China Sea, from shallow water soft bottoms (58–70 m). The specimens from the Persian Gulf and from Madagascar are regarded as members of the same species because they do not differ from the South China Sea specimens. The deep-water records by Kirkegaard (1996), although coming from the same region, could belong to a different species. His materials were not found in the Copenhagen museum, and clarifying this issue requires the examination of his specimens.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D34C87B84D1B2602FF44F91B6459FA4E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I.	Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. (2011): Revision of Piromis Kinberg, 1867 and Pycnoderma Grube, 1877 (Polychaeta: Flabelligeridae). Zootaxa 2819: 1-50, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.277211
