WoRMS name details
Encope (Echinadesma) Phelan, 1972
737637 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:737637)
unaccepted (subjective junior synonym)
Subgenus
Encope micropora L. Agassiz, 1841 (type by original designation)
- Species Encope (Echinadesma) perspectiva L. Agassiz, 1841 accepted as Encope micropora L. Agassiz, 1841 (subjective junior synonym)
- Species Encope (Echinadesma) emarginata (Leske, 1778) represented as Encope emarginata (Leske, 1778)
- Species Encope (Echinadesma) micropora L. Agassiz, 1841 represented as Encope micropora L. Agassiz, 1841
- Species Encope (Echinadesma) wetmorei A.H. Clark, 1946 represented as Encope wetmorei A.H. Clark, 1946 accepted as Encope micropora L. Agassiz, 1841
marine, brackish, fresh, terrestrial
recent + fossil
Phelan, T. H. 1972. Comments on the echinoid genus Encope and a new subgenus. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 85, 109-130.
page(s): 126-128 [details]
page(s): 126-128 [details]
Status A clear separation between the Encope (Echinadesma) and Encope (Encope) is difficult because all intermediate states...
Status A clear separation between the Encope (Echinadesma) and Encope (Encope) is difficult because all intermediate states between a continuous and fully disjunct interambulacrum 5 exist. Separation of the disjunct forms seems thus arbitrary and Echinadesma is considered as junior synonym of Encope in The Echinoid Directory.
Recently, Coppard & Lessios (2017) performed a multi-gene phylogeographic analysis of the genus Encope. While they did not specifically discuss the status of the subgenus Echniodesma, they commented that Phelan's subdivision of the genus Encope was not supported by the molecular phylogeny. According to their results E. emarginata and E. grandis are part of one clade, which is incompatible with the topology implied by the subgeneric classification of Phelan. Clearly disjunction of interambulacrum 5 (the diagnostic character of Echinadesma) evolved multiple times in Encope, making the subgenus Echinadesma (when defined upon this feature) polyphyletic. [details]
Recently, Coppard & Lessios (2017) performed a multi-gene phylogeographic analysis of the genus Encope. While they did not specifically discuss the status of the subgenus Echniodesma, they commented that Phelan's subdivision of the genus Encope was not supported by the molecular phylogeny. According to their results E. emarginata and E. grandis are part of one clade, which is incompatible with the topology implied by the subgeneric classification of Phelan. Clearly disjunction of interambulacrum 5 (the diagnostic character of Echinadesma) evolved multiple times in Encope, making the subgenus Echinadesma (when defined upon this feature) polyphyletic. [details]
Kroh, A.; Mooi, R. (2025). World Echinoidea Database. Encope (Echinadesma) Phelan, 1972. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at: https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=737637 on 2025-04-16
Date
action
by
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 License
Nomenclature
original description
Phelan, T. H. 1972. Comments on the echinoid genus Encope and a new subgenus. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 85, 109-130.
page(s): 126-128 [details]
page(s): 126-128 [details]
Taxonomy
status source
Coppard, S.E. & Lessios, H.A. (2017). Phylogeography of the sand dollar genus Encope: implications regarding the Central American Isthmus and rates of molecular evolution. <em>Scientific Reports.</em> 7(1): 11520., available online at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11875-w [details]
From editor or global species database
Publication date 30. August 1972 [details]Status A clear separation between the Encope (Echinadesma) and Encope (Encope) is difficult because all intermediate states between a continuous and fully disjunct interambulacrum 5 exist. Separation of the disjunct forms seems thus arbitrary and Echinadesma is considered as junior synonym of Encope in The Echinoid Directory.
Recently, Coppard & Lessios (2017) performed a multi-gene phylogeographic analysis of the genus Encope. While they did not specifically discuss the status of the subgenus Echniodesma, they commented that Phelan's subdivision of the genus Encope was not supported by the molecular phylogeny. According to their results E. emarginata and E. grandis are part of one clade, which is incompatible with the topology implied by the subgeneric classification of Phelan. Clearly disjunction of interambulacrum 5 (the diagnostic character of Echinadesma) evolved multiple times in Encope, making the subgenus Echinadesma (when defined upon this feature) polyphyletic. [details]
From editor or global species database
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
Image from synonym
