RAS source details
Pettibone, Marian H. (1969). The genera Polyeunoa McIntosh, Hololepidella Willey, and three new genera (Polychaeta, Polynoidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. 82: 43-62.
51353
Pettibone, Marian H.
1969
The genera <i>Polyeunoa</i> McIntosh, <i>Hololepidella</i> Willey, and three new genera (Polychaeta, Polynoidae)
Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington
82: 43-62
Publication
World Polychaeta Database (WPolyD)
Available for editors 
[None. Introduction starts as:]
The polynoid genera Polyeunoa McIntosh (1885) and Hololepidella Willey (1905) have been used by various polychaete workers to include identical species. The species referred to the two genera are generally elongate, with numerous segments and numerous pairs of elytra. In addition, the lateral antennae are inserted ventrally on the prostomium, i. e., harmothoid type of insertion. The elytra in the posterior segments may be rather irregularly arranged in these elongate species. In a study of numerous specimens of the type-species of Polyeunoa, P. laevis McIntosh, Bergström (1916) pointed out the unusual variability in the number and arrangement of the elytra. At the same time, he suggested that Polynoe tuta Grube and Hololepidella commensalis Willey might both be referred to Polyeunoa, since these two species also show variability in the arrangement of the elytra in the posterior regions. The elytral variability was well shown for Polynoe tuta (as Halosydna) by Johnson (1901). Augener (1918, 1922) suggested that Hololepidella be used for polynoids with a harmothoid prostomium and numerous elytra extending along the body. Neither Bergström nor Augener emphasized differences in the arrangement of the elytra in the anterior region or other parapodial differences. Berkeley and Berkeley (1948) and Pettibone (1953), following Bergström, referred Polynoe tuta Grube to Polyeunoa McIntosh; emended Bergström. The same species was referred to Hololepidella, following Augener, by Annenkova (1937), Hartman (1948), and Uschakov (1955). Similarly, Polynoe nigropunctata Horst was referred to Hololepidella by Day (1957) and to Polyeunoa by Day (1967). Thus, it was more or less generally understood that the arrangement of the elytra in these elongate species was so variable that their exact arrangement was not especially important and, as such, often was not included in the original descriptions.
The polynoid genera Polyeunoa McIntosh (1885) and Hololepidella Willey (1905) have been used by various polychaete workers to include identical species. The species referred to the two genera are generally elongate, with numerous segments and numerous pairs of elytra. In addition, the lateral antennae are inserted ventrally on the prostomium, i. e., harmothoid type of insertion. The elytra in the posterior segments may be rather irregularly arranged in these elongate species. In a study of numerous specimens of the type-species of Polyeunoa, P. laevis McIntosh, Bergström (1916) pointed out the unusual variability in the number and arrangement of the elytra. At the same time, he suggested that Polynoe tuta Grube and Hololepidella commensalis Willey might both be referred to Polyeunoa, since these two species also show variability in the arrangement of the elytra in the posterior regions. The elytral variability was well shown for Polynoe tuta (as Halosydna) by Johnson (1901). Augener (1918, 1922) suggested that Hololepidella be used for polynoids with a harmothoid prostomium and numerous elytra extending along the body. Neither Bergström nor Augener emphasized differences in the arrangement of the elytra in the anterior region or other parapodial differences. Berkeley and Berkeley (1948) and Pettibone (1953), following Bergström, referred Polynoe tuta Grube to Polyeunoa McIntosh; emended Bergström. The same species was referred to Hololepidella, following Augener, by Annenkova (1937), Hartman (1948), and Uschakov (1955). Similarly, Polynoe nigropunctata Horst was referred to Hololepidella by Day (1957) and to Polyeunoa by Day (1967). Thus, it was more or less generally understood that the arrangement of the elytra in these elongate species was so variable that their exact arrangement was not especially important and, as such, often was not included in the original descriptions.
Systematics, Taxonomy
Enipo rhombigera Ehlers, 1908 accepted as Polyeunoa laevis McIntosh, 1885 (source of synonymy)
Polyeunoa laevis McIntosh, 1885 (redescription)
Polyeunoa laevis McIntosh, 1885 (redescription)
