再论三叶虫Megapalaeolenus Chang,1966属的无效地位

作者2004年根据保存于法国的模式标本和产自我国三峡地区的新材料以及对以往所发现的化石材料的研究,认为Megapalaeolenus Chang,1966一属不能成立,是Palaeolenus Mansuy,1912的晚出异名;其模式种Palaeolenus deprati Mansuy,1912也是Palaeolenus的模式种Palaeolenus douvillei,Mansuy,1912的晚出异名.提出属名Megapalaeolenus Chang和种名Palaeolenusdeprati Mansuy均应废弃的结论.最近,罗惠麟等发表了一系列采自模式标本产地附近的标本,为笔者的上述结论提供了更有力的证据.根据这些新材料,笔者不同意罗惠麟等认为Megapalaeolenus继续有效、Palaeolenusdeprati能够成立的观点.

FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE INVALIDITY OF MEGAPALEOILENUS CHANG,1966

Based on examination of the monotype of Palaeolenus deprati Mansuy,1912(a species designated by Chang(Zhang,1966)as the type species of his new genus Megapalaeolenus Chang,1966)and our palaeolenid material from western Hubei,the authors(2004)concluded that Palaeolenus deprati is a j unior synonym of the type speties of Palaeolenus Mansuy,1912,Palaeolenus douvillei Mansuy,1912,and that the genus Megapalaeolenus should be regarded as a j unior synonym of Palaeolenus.Recently,Luo et al.(2007,2008)reported rich material of palaeolenid trilobites from localities close tO the type localities of both P.douvillei and P.departi in eastern Yunnan.The new material is important not only because it comes from the type area of Palaeolenus but also provides further evidences to confirm our earlier interpretation.The new material demonstrates that the morphological characters of "Megapalaeolenus"and"M.deprati"are almost indistinguishable in various aspects from PalaeolenU$and P.douvillei respectively and,therefore,it is no longer appropriate to treat Megapalaeolenus and Palaeolenus deprati as valid taxa as suggested by LUO et al.(2007,2008).