Amphimedon nodosa (Linnaeus, 1759)

Van Soest, Rob W. M., 2025, Typification of Porifera described in the 10 edition of Linnaeus’ Systema Naturae, volume II, 1759, Zootaxa 5638 (1), pp. 1-65 : 53

Amphimedon nodosa

The neotype was successfully sequenced by Naturalis colleague Niels van der Windt, and submitted to Genbank under accession nrs. PP372826 (COI), PP377812 (28SrRNA) and PP377813 (18SrRNA), using the present combination Amphimedon nodosa . The 28SrRNA sequence is 100% similar to a sequence of a specimen from NE Brazil sequenced by Leal et al. (2017), GenBank accession nr. KY825184 ). The COI sequence is for 100% similar to the sequence of a specimen from Belize sequenced by Pankey et al. (2022), Genbank acc. nr. MZ486694 . Further CO1 trees were published in Redmond et al. (2011: fig. 3, GenBank accession nr. JN178945 ), Erpenbeck et al. (2007: fig. 1, GenBank accession nrs. EF519558 –60), Raleigh et al. (2007: Fig. 1 , Bahamas specimen, GenBank accession nr. EF655737 ) and Lavrov et al. (2008: Fig. 6 , Florida specimen, GenBank accession nr. EU237474 ), generally showing 90% or higher similarity.A recent whole mitochondrial genome sequence by Lavrov et al. (2008) also indicates 100% similarity. The 18SrRNA sequence is for 100% similar to a sequence of USNM 1133713 from the Caribbean coast of Panama, 9.3517°N 82.2594°W sequenced by Redmond et al. (2013), GenBank accession nr. KC902400 , whereas the sequence of a specimen sequenced by Lavrov et al. (2008, GenBank accession nr. EU702409 ) has 99.88% similarity. Not all of these studies showed closely similar sequences, notably COI results were deviating (e.g. Erpenbeck et al. 2007). Several additional works reporting sequences of individuals of Amphimedon compressa , a junior synonym of A. nodosa , were published, from unknown or unlikely localities ( Vietnam, China) which are here not further elaborated.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Pages reproduced from A. Van Royen 1740 (pp. 521–522) treating Spongia species. Note that only 10 species were listed (Spongia fluviatilis was omitted compared to Linnaeus 1753b cf. Fig. 2) and the order of presentation is different.

FIGURE 6. Images assigned to Haliclona (Haliclona) oculata by various authors (originally as Spongia). A. Parkinson’s ‘Spongia ramosa brittannica’ (1640: 1304, fig. 3); B. Ruysch’ ‘Spongioides ramosissima marina oculata’ (1710: pl. V fig. 1); C. Ellis’ ‘Spongia ramosa britannica Park.’ (1755: 80, pl. XXXII figs F, f and g); D. Seba’s ‘Spongia erecta ramosa mollis atque subtilis’, (1758: vol. III pl. 97 fig. 6, from the Netherlands); E. Houttuyn’s Spongia oculata ‘Oogjesspons’ (1772: 452, pl. CXXXV fig. 4); F. Esper’s Spongia oculata (1790: pl. I figs 1–2); G. Montagu’s Spongia oculata (1814: Pl. VI fig. 2); H. Grant’s Spongia oculata (1826: fig. 22).