Gymnodoris impudica (Rüppell & Leuckart, 1828)
Doris impudica Rüppell & Leuckart, 1828: 33, pl. 10 figs a-c.
Trevelyana rubropapulosa Bergh, 1905: 191, pl. 4 fig.15, pl. 17 figs 27-31, pl. 18 figs 1-3 (Selayer, Indonesia).
Gymnodoris impudica White, 1951: 242; Yonow, 2008: 135.
Gymnodoris ceylonica Baba, 1989: 192— 194, fig. 1 [non G. ceylonica (Kelaart, 1858)].
Gymnodoris rubropapulosa Rudman & Darvell, 1990: 50.
Non-Indonesian material.— RMNH.MOL.131663, Ningaloo Reef, West Australia Bay, NW Australia, 2 m depth, xi.1989, leg. H. Debelius, two specimens 24 × 15 mm and 25 × 15 mm pres.; N of Busango, Philippines, v.2009, photos of one individual 32 mm, J. Hinterkircher.
Description.— Gymnodoris impudica is easily recognized by its large white body covered in large and small soft orange pustules: these are slightly raised and often darker around their edges. The gills and rhinophores are also orange (pl. 3 fig. 4). The 9-11 gills are arranged in a circle around the anal papillae. No colour or raised spots remain on the preserved specimens. The radular formula is 25 × 45-55.0.55-45: the innermost lateral has a duck-bill-shaped base and a short straight cusp with a swollen tip (fig. 6a). The subsequent laterals have smaller bases and longer thinner cusps. The tip is slightly bent on the last few teeth (fig. 6b).
Remarks.— Bergh (1905) described a specimen (65 mm) from Indonesia with 11 gills arranged around the anal papilla, and a radular formula of 40 × 33.0.33. White’s (1951) 45 mm preserved specimen from the Red Sea had a radular formula of 28 × 41.0.41.
This large species is widely distributed from the Red Sea through the Indian Ocean as far south as South Africa, across to Indonesia and the Philippines to Japan. Gymnodoris impudica was only recently identified with its older name in a work investigating the Red Sea fauna (Yonow, 2008): Bergh described and illustrated Trevelyana rubropapulosa from Selayer in 1905 but Rüppell & Leuckart had already described and illustrated Doris impudica from the Red Sea in 1828. This name is chosen in accordance with Article 24.2.2 (ICZN, 1999) for First Reviser, chosen because Rüppell & Leuckart’s endeavours were clear and unambiguous, and most of their species are recognisable today.