153308 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:153308)
Some authors stated that Doris bilamellata should probably be seen as a complex; therefore the name Doris fusca Müller, 1776 would be a better option. According to Bouchet & Trady this name was published in the year 1768, but in this year Müller published only a figure, without any description (Pruvot-Fol 1954). Müller himself has placed his Doris fusca in synonomy with Linnaeus'Doris bilamellata.
Many authors prefer Onchidorus Blainville, 1816 as the valid name for the genus (Winckworth, 1932; Bouchet & Tardy, 1976; Thompson & Brown, 1976; Cattaneo & Barletta, 1984). According to Pruvot-Fol (1954) however this latter is a nomen nu [details]
The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
Some authors stated that Doris bilamellata should probably be seen as a complex; therefore the name Doris fusca Müller, 1776 would be a better option. According to Bouchet & Trady this name was published in the year 1768, but in this year Müller published only a figure, without any description (Pruvot-Fol 1954). Müller himself has placed his Doris fusca in synonomy with Linnaeus'Doris bilamellata.
Many authors prefer Onchidorus Blainville, 1816 as the valid name for the genus (Winckworth, 1932; Bouchet & Tardy, 1976; Thompson & Brown, 1976; Cattaneo & Barletta, 1984). According to Pruvot-Fol (1954) however this latter is a nomen nu [details]