“…2.1). Such an interpretation can be recognized in the illustrations and/or synonymy lists by Oppel (1863), Benecke (1866), Favre (1877), Di Stefano (1883), Valduga (1954), Barthel (1959), Berckhemer and Hölder (1959), Collignon (1959, at least for H. laevigatum Collignon, 1959), Stephanov (1959), Enay et al (1971, 2005), Olóriz (1978), Sapunov (1979), Mariotti et al (1979), Rossi (1984), Sarti (1984, 1985), Verma and Westermann (1984), Geyssant in De Wever et al (1986), Howarth (1992, 1998), Pathak (1993), Wierzbowski (1994), Benzagaggh and Atrops (1997), Caracuel and Olóriz (1999), Cecca (1999), Benzagaggh (2000), Zeiss (2001), Enay (2009), Fözy et al (2011), Grigore (2011), and Schweigert et al (2012), among others. Revision based on well-preserved material collected bed-by-bed is needed to propose a precise interpretation (e.g., Zeiss, 2001), which must be based on population-level data to reach a conclusive evaluation of phenotype variability in the Oppel species.…”