Back
Systematophora vestita
Systematophora vestita (Deflandre, 1938) Davey 1982; Emendation: Sarjeant, 1960b, p.397, as Baltisphaeridium vestitum.
Now Surculosphaeridium?. Originally Hystrichosphaeridium, subsequently Baltisphaeridium (an acritarch genus), thirdly Surculosphaeridium, fourthly (and now) Surculosphaeridium?, fifthly Multiplicisphaeridium (an acritarch genus), sixthly Systematophora. Stancliffe and Sarjeant, 1990 questionably retained this species in Surculosphaeridium Davey et al., 1966.
Taxonomic junior synonym: Polystephanosphaera valensii, according to Courtinat (1989, p.173) — however, Stancliffe and Sarjeant (1990, p.209) retained Polystephanosphaera (as and now Systematophora) valensii.
Holotype: Deflandre, 1938, pl.11, fig.5
Age: Oxfordian
Translation Courtinat, 1989: LPP
Courtinant, 1989, p.174
Remark: The new combination proposed by Davey (1982) seems fully justified. The holotype of S. vestita has been reexamined, and it indeed possesses processes grouped in complexes, the latter not interconnected or provided with ring-trabeculae. In the holotype, the processes are perforate, like those of S. cribrotubiferum, but this is not a constant feature in this species. The processes are slender, or firmer with a more or less enlarged basis. These characteristics correspond with those of S. valensii (Sarjeant); these two species are considered to be synonymous.
Now Surculosphaeridium?. Originally Hystrichosphaeridium, subsequently Baltisphaeridium (an acritarch genus), thirdly Surculosphaeridium, fourthly (and now) Surculosphaeridium?, fifthly Multiplicisphaeridium (an acritarch genus), sixthly Systematophora. Stancliffe and Sarjeant, 1990 questionably retained this species in Surculosphaeridium Davey et al., 1966.
Taxonomic junior synonym: Polystephanosphaera valensii, according to Courtinat (1989, p.173) — however, Stancliffe and Sarjeant (1990, p.209) retained Polystephanosphaera (as and now Systematophora) valensii.
Holotype: Deflandre, 1938, pl.11, fig.5
Age: Oxfordian
Translation Courtinat, 1989: LPP
Courtinant, 1989, p.174
Remark: The new combination proposed by Davey (1982) seems fully justified. The holotype of S. vestita has been reexamined, and it indeed possesses processes grouped in complexes, the latter not interconnected or provided with ring-trabeculae. In the holotype, the processes are perforate, like those of S. cribrotubiferum, but this is not a constant feature in this species. The processes are slender, or firmer with a more or less enlarged basis. These characteristics correspond with those of S. valensii (Sarjeant); these two species are considered to be synonymous.