Inventory of Cenozoic radiolarian species (Class Polycystinea) - 1834 - 2020 Author Suzuki, Noritoshi Author Caulet, Jean-Pierre Author Dumitrica, Paulian text Geodiversitas 2022 2022-02-03 44 5 75 205 journal article 10.5252/geodiversitas2022v44a5 1638-9395 5999687 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D8BD6636-2C72-4377-808A-556AEB078E58

TABLE 1. — This table objectively summarizes the general result of the whole data gathered in the inventory. The “species name” refers to the number of Cenozoic taxa (species or subspecies) that have been named since their first description by Meyen (1834) of Sphaerozoum fuscum, a colonial Collodaria. In this table two intervals (1834-1959 and 1960-2020) are differentiated to stress the huge contribution of new Cenozoic species during the initial stage in the research of radiolarians. The pioneering work of Riedel (Reports of the Swedish Deep-Sea Expedition, 1957) proved the stratigraphic value of this group and, at the same time, marked a point of inflection in the taxonomy and stratigraphy of Cenozoic Polycystinea.Currently,the most salient data on this table is the daunting contribution of Ernst Haeckel,emanating from the works that followed the Challenger Expedition (1872–1876). Nonetheless,the “actual amount” of new species is too small if we take into account the high number of species that were never illustrated. From a semantic point of view the Latin term “ dubium ” means uncertain, but according to the International Code of Zoological nomenclature it is an available name. Nevertheless, the availability of a doubtful, or even unfigured type only destabilizes the taxonomy. For that reason, the dubia taxa should not be counted in the total of available species names; especially, those whose types were never figured or stored in a scientific institution. (*), It must be emphasized that, the term “available” in taxonomy does not mean “valid”. This inventory does not provide a revision on the validity from a synonymy point of view. This is actually beyond the scope of this review and hence; “available”, includes both senior and junior synonyms without distinction. From a “juridical” point of view, a taxon name without name-bearing specimens or other alternative leading to their existence (e.g. study notes, slides codes, registration evidences, etc.), do not provide objective evidences for the real existence of the type for the species. The “Principles” in the Introduction of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature expressly state that:“ The device of name-bearing types allows names to be applied to taxa without infringing upon taxonomic judgment ”. As the “Principle” has superiority over all the articles, any articles in lower branches of the introductory principles violating the Principle must not be taken into consideration. For this reason, all the taxonomic acts using an “un-illustrated species” violates the Principle once again. (**), These entries do not include those dubia or nuda taxa that are either homonyms or erroneously described as Polycystinea.

	Haeckel 1861-1887	Ehrenberg 1839-1876	rest of authors 1834-1959	subtotal 1834-1959	subtotal 1960-2020	Total
Nomen nudum**	5	55	22	82	37	119
Nomen oblitum	–	1	–	1	–	1
Homonyms (17 n.d.; 1 n.n.)	5	–	21	26	6	32
Invalid	4	–	–	4	–	4
Not Polycystinea (2 n.d.; 5 n.n.)	20	13	39	72	4	76
UNAVAILABLE	34	69	82	185	47	232
Nomen dubium ** (with figure)	182	40	503	725	221	946
Nomen dubium ** (without figure)	1612	38	103	1753	4	1757
AVAILABLE * (without n. dubia)	1147	367	1020	2534	1429	3963
SPECIES NAMES	2975	514	1708	5197	1702	6898