{"id":412,"date":"2012-05-15T21:10:58","date_gmt":"2012-05-15T19:10:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/opistobranquis.info\/trapania-lineatatrapania-lineatatrapania-lineata"},"modified":"2025-03-08T10:30:31","modified_gmt":"2025-03-08T09:30:31","slug":"trapania-lineata","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/opistobranquis.info\/en\/guia\/doridida\/doridoidei\/onchidoridoidea\/trapania-lineata\/","title":{"rendered":"Trapania lineata"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

Trapania lineata<\/em> Haefelfinger, 1960<\/h3>\n

\"Trapania<\/div>
Trapania lineata<\/em> by Enric Madrenas<\/center><\/span>

<\/p>

WoRMS Taxonomic Information<\/h3>
Current accepted name: Trapania lineata<\/em> Haefelfinger, 1960<\/strong><\/div>

Current classification<\/h4>
Superdomain<\/th>Biota<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Kingdom<\/th>Animalia<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Phylum<\/th>Mollusca<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Class<\/th>Gastropoda<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Subclass<\/th>Heterobranchia<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Infraclass<\/th>Euthyneura<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Subterclass<\/th>Ringipleura<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Superorder<\/th>Nudipleura<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Order<\/th>Doridida<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Infraorder<\/th>Doridoidei<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Superfamily<\/th>Onchidoridoidea<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Family<\/th>Goniodorididae<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Subfamily<\/th>Anculinae<\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Genus<\/th>Trapania<\/em><\/a><\/td><\/tr>
Species<\/th>Trapania lineata<\/em> Haefelfinger, 1960<\/a><\/td><\/tr><\/table>

Classification provided by the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS). [140043<\/a>]<\/p><\/div>Taxonomic note<\/strong>: The study by Paz-Sedano et al. (2022) on the genus Trapania<\/em> conducted a thorough morphological and molecular analysis, leading to the conclusion that Trapania hispalensis<\/em> and Trapania pallida<\/em> do not represent distinct species, but rather are part of the intraspecific variability of Trapania lineata<\/em>. The study compared in detail the anatomical structures and coloration of the three species in different populations. It was observed that differences in pigmentation, particularly in the distribution of white lines and the presence of white or yellow spots, were within the range of natural variability for a single species. This was especially evident in specimens from different locations that exhibited combinations of traits attributed to both T. hispalensis<\/em> and T. pallida<\/em>, without consistent patterns of differentiation. Moreover, external structures such as the rhinophores, gills, and extra-branchial and extra-rhinophoral appendages showed identical morphology across the three supposed species. Differences in the size and number of lamellae on the rhinophores were attributed to intraspecific variation and not to a valid taxonomic distinction.
\nThe analysis of the radula and reproductive system revealed that T. hispalensis, T. pallida<\/em>, and T. lineata<\/em> share an identical structure in the denticles and radular formula, with no significant differences, although variations were sometimes observed even between the teeth of a single radula. The reproductive system structures, including the shape of the penis and the prostate gland, were also virtually identical across the three taxa. Genetic analysis based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences also confirmed that there were no significant genetic differences between T. hispalensis, T. pallida<\/em>, and T. lineata<\/em>. The specimens studied belonged to the same monophyletic clade with very low levels of genetic divergence, clearly indicating that they are part of a single species. T. pallida<\/em> was somewhat genetically separated from the other two species, likely due to geographical isolation, but not enough to be considered a distinct species. However, recent findings of this species in the Mediterranean near local morphotypes suggest that it may not end as a different species in the future.<\/p>\n

Synonyms<\/strong><\/p>\n