taxonID	type	description	language	source
03C41E51FFC2FFEC8BC8FEE291F8EA96.taxon	materials_examined	TYPE: — Pyrgodiscus armatus Kitton ex Cleve 1885 MATERIAL: BM (summarised in Natural History Museum 2021); descriptions in De Toni (1894: 1011), Van Heurck (1896: 426) and Taylor (1929: 215). Valves circular, with central dome or pillar. Surface surrounding pillar areolate with evenly spaced stout spines that taper towards their tips. Similar series of spines surrounding surface of pillar, stouter than those on lower part of valve, but not equal in length. The twin series of independent spines are a (proposed) synapomorphy of the genus. Possibly a resting spore (e. g., Chambers 1997: 344), since its first description the genus Pyrgodiscus acquired only a few additional species, some having since been transferred to more appropriate genera, others identified as synonyms of species in genera different to Pyrgodiscus, and a few awaiting further investigation (Table 2; it is of note that half of the species in Pyrgodiscus were described relatively recently by Hajós & Stradner from Late Cretaceous DSDP material [Hajós & Stradner 1975], none of which should remain in Pyrgodiscus, see below for summary). In spite of these additions, only Pyrgodiscus armatus and P. simplex should remain in the genus, although electron microscopy may inform otherwise.	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFC2FFEE8BC8F85B9502EEC3.taxon	materials_examined	TYPE LOCALITY: — CZECH REPUBLIC, Moravia, Augarten near Brno (= Br ̧ nn) (fossil, ‘ Tegel’ [= marl, clay]), Miocene – Pliocene?, E. Thum (see Thum 1885: 11 [Kl ̂ nne & M ̧ ller 1885: 11], no. ‘ 6638, Purgodiscus [sic] armatus Kitton’; Thum 1889: 14, no. 1473: 25, no. 2991, “ Tegel aus Mähren ”; Thum 1895 [1891]: 32, no. 2073: 59, no. 4226, “ Tegel v. Mähren ”) Material CZECH REPUBLIC (MORAVIA), Augarten near Brno (= Br ̧ nn) (fossil, ‘ Tegel’ [= marl, clay]), Miocene — Pliocene?: BM 7333! (Figs 9, 10), ‘ Thum, Abt. II, --- ’; BM 7334! (Figs 11 – 15, two specimens, Figs 21 - 23), BR III- 2 - B 8, BR III- 2 - B 9, ‘ Thum, Abt. VI, no. 6638 ’, see Thum 1885: 11 and Kl ̂ nne & M ̧ ller 1885: 11, ‘ 6638, Purgodiscus [sic] armatus Kitton’ slide label corrected from Purgodiscus to Pyrgodiscus,; BM 14428! (Tempère & Peragallo, Diat. Monde entier, 1 st edn, no. 174), BM 46164! (Sturt A 1101, Kitton) = Figs 21 – 23, BM 46649! (Sturt A 1588) = Figs 7, 8, BM 46653! (Sturt A 1592), BM 52996!, Tegel Br ̧ nn Mähren, ‘ Thum Abt. VI, 7125 ’, see Thum 1885: 18 and Kl ̂ nne & M ̧ ller 1885: 18, BM 52997! (Thum, no details on label), BM 52998!, BM 56043! (Wynne Baxter 1415, Weissflog), BM 56854! (Wynne Baxter 2225), BM 57612! (Wynne Baxter 2985, Kitton) = Figs 16 – 18, BM 57613 (Wynne Baxter 2986, Kitton), BM 57620 (Wynne Baxter 2993, Kitton), BM 63386! (Barker [July 1932]), BM 73527! (“ Brunn ”, Wise 1355), BM 73528! (“ Mähren 2088 | Thum | Abth. I IV 1423 ”, Wise 1356), BM Adams C 422! (Thum, Abt. II, ---), BM Adams GC 2630! (Kitton), BM Adams GC 2631! (Thum, Abt. VII, no. 2073), BM Adams J 552! (Thum, Abt. VI, no. 6638), BM Adams J 3765! (Alfredo Truan, Sep [18] 86) = Figs 19, 20, BM Adams Bess 867!, BM Adams TS 320! (Thum, Abt. II, ---), BM Adams TS 263! (Alfredo Truan, Julio [18] 88), BM Adams F 1061 (Weissflog?), ANSP Febiger 693 (Weissflog, isotype, see Mahoney & Reimer, 1997: 173), BR VIII- 66 - B 2 (Weissflog), BR VIII- 66 - B 3 (Weissflog 1583), BR VIII- 66 - B 4 (Weissflog 1314); ANSP Shulze 1028, ANSP Shulze 1136, ANSP Shulze 1537, ANSP Boyer 0 - 5 - 11, ANSP Boyer E- 5 - 5; BRM DA- 71, DA- 72 “ Br ̧ nn Mähren Tegel ”; W 3075 a – c?, W 3086 a – f, “ Br ̧ nn ”. RUSSIA, SINGILIEWSKY (BM 103893!, Hendey 5075 ex Meakin, July 1952, one specimen)	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFC2FFEE8BC8F85B9502EEC3.taxon	description	ILLUSTRATIONS: — Schmidt 1886 [Jan. 1 st 4]: pl. 92, figs 15, 16, reproduced as Figures 3, 6 [= Sch ̧ tt 1896: 76, fig. 115 A, B; = Karsten 1928: 224, fig. 247 A, B; = Proschkina-Lavrenko, 1949: pl. 91, figs 4 a, b], “ Br ̧ nn (Präp. v. Thum in Janisch’s S) 660 […] Pyrgodiscus armatus F. Kitton […] ”); Schmidt 1886 [Jan. 1 st]: pl. 91, fig. 8, “ Szent Peter (Thum) ”; Haeckel 1904, Kunstformen der Natur: pl. 84; Taylor 1929: pl. II, fig 14 (“ Pyrgodiscus armatus, ad. Nat. Br ̧ nn, Moravia ”); Lefébure 1947: pl. X, fig. 7 (= Jousé 1963: 121, figs 122 a, b); Baranov 1942: pl. 1, figs 6, 7. Valves circUlar, diameter 70 – 90 μm, with central dOme Or pillar, ca. 18 – 28 μm in height, ca. 35 – 40 μm. SUrface surrounding pillar areolate with evenly spaced stout spines, ca. 8 in all, broad at base, tapering towards tips. Surface undulates with spine at each undulation. Similar series of spines surrounding surface of pillar, stouter than those on lower part of valve, but not equal in length. Appearance when viewed from top down suggests lower series of spines alternates with those on pillar. Thum’s various issues of the ‘ Typen Platten’ series have been briefly discussed above. All material found in BM is listed in the ‘ Material’ section above, along with a note on specimens from the ANSP, BR and W collections (specimens other than BM have not been examined). There are 25 slides in all; excepting the strewn slides and those from BR and ANSP, there are 29 specimens, all structurally more or less the same as can be determined from LM (Figs 16 – 23). All the specimens (bar two) come from the ‘ Augarten near Brno (= Br ̧ nn) ’ material. Some raw material from ‘ Augarten near Brno (= Br ̧ nn) ’ was examined but no specimens were found so electron microscopy could not be used. 4 Dates from Hanna (1969) Several slides in BM from various Russian deposits were said to have specimens of Pyrgodiscus armatus. One, from ‘ Singiliewsky’ (BM 103893!, Hendey 5075 ex Meakin, July 1952), had a single specimen mounted in girdle view. Another, from Kamishev, Russia (BM 65720! ex Swatman), was said to have a specimen of Pyrgodiscus armatus but did not, and three further slides from Russian deposits (BM 32625!, BM 32627! and BM 33210!), all strewn slides, were also said to have specimens of Pyrgodiscus armatus but no specimens could be found in any of these either.	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFC1FFE18BC8F99393BAE808.taxon	description	(Figures 24 – 33)	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFC1FFE18BC8F99393BAE808.taxon	materials_examined	TYPE LOCALITY: — RUSSIA, ‘ Arkhan- gel’skoye-Kurojedovo, Ulyanovsk’, formerly Simbirsk, USSR, Witt 1885: 30, pl. VI, fig. 6; Witt 1886: 166, pl. VI, fig. 6 MATERIAL RUSSIA, SARATOV, BM 64641! (eX Barker 185, twO specimens, FigUres 26 – 29, specimen figUred: d = 54 μm, cdw = 34 μm), BM 65879! (eX FergUsOn, One specimen, FigUres 30 – 33, specimen: d = 44 μm, cdw = 31 μm); CARLOVA, BM 66038! (Ferguson [ex Barker 171], One specimen: d = 51 μm, cdw = 33 μm); BR (Weissflog 1400 and Weissflog 2270, “ O. Witt […] Archangelsk-Kurijedowo, Gouv. Simbirsk, Russland ”) ILLUSTRATIONS: — Schmidt 1886 [Jul. 1 st]: pl. 100, figs 13 (= Figure 25) [= Proschkina-Lavrenko: pl. 37, fig. 3, 1949] (“ Archangelsk (Weissfl.) ”), fig. 14, “ Simbirsk (Weissfl.); dieses räthselhafte Gebilde ist viell. die Unterschale eines Pyrgodiscus ”); Baranov 1942: pl. 1, fig. 9. Valves circUlar, diameter 40 – 52 μm, with central dOme Or pillar, ca. 20 μm in height, ca. 30 – 35 μm. SUrface sUrrOUnding pillar areolate with evenly spaced stout spines, ca. 6 – 7, tapering towards tip. Series of spines surrounding surface of pillar, as small as those on lower part of valve. The only specimens examined so far are from Ulyanovsk (Simbirsk).	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFCFFFE18BC8FD00933EED10.taxon	materials_examined	TYPE LOCALITY: — Limestone clay from Yedo (Tokyo), Japan (holotype: Brun & Tempère 1889: pl. 4, fig. 11 b – specimen in pl. 4, fig. 11 a “ was included as pertaining to a material found alive in the Sandwich Islands (Hawaiian Islands) ” (Sar et al. 2017: 250). Basionym: Porodiscus calyciflos Tempère & Brun in Brun & Tempère 1889: 50, pl. 4, fig. 11 b Synonym: Pyrgodiscus calyciflos (Tempère & Brun in Brun & Tempère) De Toni 1894: 1011 TYPE: — JAPAN, “ Yedo [Tokyo] (Miocene) ”, holotype: illustration in Brun & Tempère (1889: pl. 4, fig. 11 b, see Sar et al. 2017: 247, 250). MATERIAL EXAMINED: HAWAII, BM 60030! (“ Sandwich Is. | Pyrgodiscus calyciflos | Wynne Baxter 6941 ”, Tempère slide), BM Adams F 1043! (“ Sandwich | J. Tempère) JAPAN, BM 62150! (“ Fossil Marin | Senday, Japan | E. Thum ex Baker ”);	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFCFFFE18BC8FE609305EB9C.taxon	materials_examined	TYPE: — GERMANY, “ hannoverschen Gault ” (Forti & Schulz 1933, ‘ “ Gault ” Formation (Albian) near Hannover (northwest Germany) ’, Gersonde & Harwood 1990: 367). Gersonde & Harwood commented on the locality, writing: “ Unfortunately, Forti and Schulz 1933 [1932] did not indicate a type locality. According to Benda (1982), the deposit can no longer be located nor any original raw or type material ” (Gersonde & Harwood 1990: 367; see also Georgi 1976).	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFCFFFE28BC8FBB4923DE9F0.taxon	materials_examined	TYPE: — DENMARK, Mors (“ In stratis tertiariis ad Mors in insula J ̧ ttland [sic] ”, Pantocsek 1905: 90; BM 68373 – 5!, Tempère & Peragallo, Diatomées du monde entire, 2 nd edn: 16, “ MORS (Jutland) | (Dépôt fossile Marin) ”, nos 27 – 29; the index (Tables) notes only no. 29 as having Pyrgodiscus kinkeri Tempère & Peragallo, 1915: 54), BM Adams L 22! (“ F ̧ r Jutland | 2.3. [19] 15 | J. A. L. [ong] ”).	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
03C41E51FFCFFFE28BC8FBB4923DE9F0.taxon	description	ILLUSTRATION: — Desikachary et al. (1987: pl. 214, figs 1, 2, Indian Ocean sediments. It has been suggested that this is a species of Omphalotheca jutlandica (e. g., Homann 1991: 131, taf. 53, figs 1 – 11 and taf. 53, figs 12 – 14 [“ Omphalotheca aff. jutlandica ”] and Chambers 1997: 265 – 6). A specimen from BM Adams L 22 (“ F ̧ r Jutland ”, Figure 35) partially supports that view, but it is possibly a species of Trunculatus (cf., Truncatulus tortonicus in Suto 2006: figs 128 – 133).	en	Williams, David M., Sims, Pat A. (2023): Notes on the diatom collection of the Natural History Museum, London (BM) VII: An account of some original specimens of Pyrgodiscus (Bacillariophyta) with notes on Stephanogonia (Bacillariophyta). Phytotaxa 589 (3): 213-229, DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.589.3.1
