Bougainvillia muscus
species of cnidarian
Bougainvillia muscus is a marine invertebrate, a species of hydroid in the suborder Anthomedusae.
Taxonomy
In 1844, van Beneden named the hydroid form of this species as Eudendrium ramosum. Strethill Wright showed that it did not belong in the genus Eudendrium and placed it in Atractylis. Later Allman placed it in Bougainvillia based on its similarity to Bougainvillia britannica. Strethill Wright reared some medusae to maturity and decided that the species was in fact Bougainvillia britannica. However, confusion remained because the three hydroid forms, B. ramosa, B. fruticosa and B. muscus were so similar. The name B. ramosa has been widely used for this species in the past but B. muscus is now the accepted name.
Description
B. muscus is a colonial hydroid forming irregular, straggling branched bushes. The individual polyps have two rings of tentacles pointing alternately upwards and downwards. The colony may grow to about 120 millimetres in height with polyps up to three millimetres long.
The public source identifies “Bougainvillia muscus” as species of cnidarian. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Bougainvillia, muscus and species.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Bougainvillia muscus”, the useful work is to connect “species of cnidarian” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1935239. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1844.
Current terminology should not be projected backward without checking the classification used when the underlying evidence was created. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Bougainvillia muscus”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Bougainvillia muscus primary sources, Bougainvillia muscus archive and Bougainvillia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bougainvillia muscus”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Bougainvillia muscus” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.