Quoy and Gaimard, 1827
Nectophores with simple somatocyst without side branches. Sinuous lateral radial canals on nectosac. Bracts kidney-shaped, but with characteristic arrangement of canals. The status of the generic name Rosacea was briefly discussed by Totton (1965), who noted that the name presently may not be being applied in the way the original authors intended. However, so as not to further complicate the involved nomenclature he proposed to retain the use of the name Rosacea in the way that Bigelow (1911) applied it, and he designated Rosacea plicata Quoy and Gaimard sensu Bigelow as its type species. Unfortunately, Margulis (1994) decided to destabilise the nomenclature, which is contrary to its very purpose, and erected a new genus Neorosacea. The issue is too complicated to be dealt with here, but the destabilisation of the nomenclature is rejected and the generic name Rosacea is used in the sense that it has been used for the past 85 years, that is sensu Bigelow (1911). Ultimately, a submission to the ICZN may be required; although it is possible that the description of the original type species Rosacea ceutensis Quoy and Gaimard, 1827 could be interpreted as that of a larval nectophore of a Rosacea sensu Bigelow species.
Rosacea cymbiformis
Rosacea plicata