(of Tayuva ketos Ev. Marcus & Er. Marcus, 1967) Marcus Ev.; Marcus Er. (1967). American opisthobranch mollusks Part I, Tropical American opisthobranchs, Part II, Opisthobranchs from the Gulf of California. <em>Studies in Tropical Oceanography.</em> 6: 1–256, pl. 1., available online at https://scholarlyrepository.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=trop_ocean [details] Available for editors [request]
basis of record
Valdés Á. (2002). A phylogenetic analysis and systematic revision of the cryptobranch dorids (Mollusca, Nudibranchia, Anthobranchia). <em>Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society.</em> 136: 535-636.
page(s): 547, 565, 569-571 [details] Available for editors [request]
source of synonymy
Dayrat B. (2010). A monographic revision of basal discodorid sea slugs (Gastropoda, Opisthobranchia, Nudibranchia, Doridina). <em>Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences.</em> Series 4, vol. 61, suppl. I, 1-403, 382 figs.
page(s): 85-94; note: see note below [details] Available for editors [request]
Present Inaccurate Introduced: alien Containing type locality
From editor or global species database
Taxonomy Dayrat (2010) places this species in the genus Tayuva Marcus & Marcus, 1967 (type species by original designation: Tayuva ketos Marcus & Marcus, 1967, from Pacific coast of Mexico) on the basis of a synapomorphy “a muscular wall in the distal portion of the reproductive system”. Discodoris lilacina in the current sense (e.g. Valdés, 2002) is indicated as “Tayuva lilacina of tropical Indo-West Pacific”, and several worldwide species currently recognized as valid are subsumed: Tayuva ketos as “Tayuva lilacina of Panamic Eastern Pacific” (contra Valdés, 2002 who holds Tayuva as a synonym of Discodoris and Discodoris ketos (Marcus & Marcus, 1967) as a valid species); Peltodoris hummelincki Marcus & Marcus, 1963 as “Tayuva lilacina of the Caribbean Sea”; Discodoris maculosa Bergh, 1884 as “Tayuva lilacina of the Mediterranean and Eastern European Atlantic”. Dayrat nevertheless acknowledges (p. 78) that “The name T. lilacina, as used here, likely refers to a species complex”. Alternatively these could be treated as valid species under Discodoris, following Valdés' (2002) view. [details]