Pseudoceratina
genus of sponges
Pseudoceratina is a genus of sponge within the family Pseudoceratinidae. They are characterized by possession of a dendritic fiber skeleton lacking laminar bark but containing pith. They have been found in a variety of habitats including the Great Barrier Reef (Queensland, Australia) and the Red Sea. Sponges of this genus have a microbiome known to produce a variety of chemicals that are used in pharmaceutical and anti-fouling activities. Notably, a species in this genus produces a chemical that is effective in inhibiting the migration of metastatic breast cancer cells.
Description
Sponges within the genus Pseudoceratina (originally named Psammaplysilla) are identified by possession of a dendritic fiber skeleton containing only pith elements while lacking the laminar bark that can be found in other sponges. Several species have been described as yellow in color, but oxidizes in air and turns a dark yellowish-green, with variations in growth type including plates, tubes, and spikey branching arms. In 2013, a proposition of a new species of Pseudoceratina was proposed. This sponge was found to have a high density of collagen fibrills, which is considered a synapomorphy for the genus Pseudoceratina, but lacks the typical skeletal framework observed in other species of this genus. Instead, this species was found within the structure of a coral.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Pseudoceratina” is genus of sponges. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Pseudoceratina, genus and sponges, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “genus of sponges” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
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 Sep 14, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4008665. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2013.
A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. 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 “Pseudoceratina”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Pseudoceratina primary sources, Pseudoceratina archive and Pseudoceratina 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 “Pseudoceratina”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Pseudoceratina” 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.