IRMNG name details
original description
Trudy Geol. Inst. Leningr. No. 275 page(s): 92 [details]
original description
Article title: Lower and Middle Paleozoic radiolarians of Kazakhstan (research methods, systematics, stratigraphic importance). [details]
basis of record
Neave, S. A. and successors. (1939-2004). Nomenclator Zoologicus, vols. 1-10 online. [developed by uBio, hosted online at MBLWHOI Library]. Previously at http://ubio.org/NomenclatorZoologicus/ (URL no longer current). , available online at https://insecta.bio.spbu.ru/z/nomenclator_zoologicus_PDF.htm [details]
status source
Nestell, G. P.; Nestell, M. K. (2021). Roadian (earliest Guadalupian, middle Permian) radiolarians from the Guadalupe Mountains, West Texas, USA Part II: Spongy radiolarians (?Entactinaria and Spumellaria). <em>Micropaleontology.</em> 67(6): 527-555., available online at https://doi.org/10.47894/mpal.67.6.01 [details]
verified source for family
The Paleobiology Database (2019 version). Available online at www.paleobiodb.org. [details]
name verified source
Neave, S. A. and successors. (1939-2004). Nomenclator Zoologicus, vols. 1-10 online. [developed by uBio, hosted online at MBLWHOI Library]. Previously at http://ubio.org/NomenclatorZoologicus/ (URL no longer current). , available online at https://insecta.bio.spbu.ru/z/nomenclator_zoologicus_PDF.htm [details]
extant flag source
NZ cross ref or inferred from publ. title [details]
Unreviewed
Taxonomic remark From Nestell & Nestell, 2021: Won (1997a) revised the genera Spongentactinella and Somphoentactinia described by Nazarov (1975) and concluded that these two genera are synonyms of the genus Tetrentactinia Foreman 1963. Such an assignment was supported recently by Caridroit et al. (2017) and Noble et al. (2017). Maletz (2011) restudied and revised the genus Tetrentactinia from the type area of Foreman’s radiolarian assemblage from the Upper Devonian Ohio Shale in the USA and he did not include the genera Spongentactinella and Somphoentactinia in the composition of the genus Tetrentactinia. Therefore, these two genera are possibly valid genera, but more information needs to be known about their internal framework. [details]
|