DOCSLIB.ORG

Annotated Checklist of New Zealand Decapoda (Arthropoda: Crustacea)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annotated Checklist of New Zealand Decapoda (Arthropoda: Crustacea) Tuhinga 22: 171–272 Copyright © Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa (2011) Annotated checklist of New Zealand Decapoda (Arthropoda: Crustacea) John C. Yaldwyn† and W. Richard Webber* † Research Associate, Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. Deceased October 2005 * Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, PO Box 467, Wellington, New Zealand ([email protected]) (Manuscript completed for publication by second author) ABSTRACT: A checklist of the Recent Decapoda (shrimps, prawns, lobsters, crayfish and crabs) of the New Zealand region is given. It includes 488 named species in 90 families, with 153 (31%) of the species considered endemic. References to New Zealand records and other significant references are given for all species previously recorded from New Zealand. The location of New Zealand material is given for a number of species first recorded in the New Zealand Inventory of Biodiversity but with no further data. Information on geographical distribution, habitat range and, in some cases, depth range and colour are given for each species. KEYWORDS: Decapoda, New Zealand, checklist, annotated checklist, shrimp, prawn, lobster, crab. Contents Introduction Methods Checklist of New Zealand Decapoda Suborder DENDROBRANCHIATA Bate, 1888 ..................................... 178 Superfamily PENAEOIDEA Rafinesque, 1815.............................. 178 Family ARISTEIDAE Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891..................... 178 Family BENTHESICYMIDAE Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891 .......... 180 Family PENAEIDAE Rafinesque, 1815 ................................... 180 Family SICYONIIDAE Ortmann, 1898 .................................. 181 Family SOLENOCERIDAE Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891 ............. 181 Superfamily SERGESTOIDEA Dana, 1852................................. 181 Family LUCIFERIDAE De Haan, 1849 .................................. 181 Family SERGESTIDAE Dana, 1852 ...................................... 181 Suborder PLEOCYEMATA Burkenroad, 1963 ....................................... 183 Infraorder STENOPODIDEA Bate, 1888 ......................................... 183 Family SPONGICOLIDAE Schram, 1986 ............................... 183 Family STENOPODIDAE Claus, 1872 .................................. 183 Infraorder CARIDEA Dana, 1852 .................................................. 184 Superfamily PASIPHAEOIDEA Dana, 1852................................ 184 172 Tuhinga, Number 22 (2011) Family PASIPHAEIDAE Dana, 1852 ..................................... 184 Superfamily OPLOPHOROIDEA Dana, 1852 ............................. 185 Family OPLOPHORIDAE Dana, 1852 .................................. 185 Superfamily ATYOIDEA De Haan, 1849 ................................... 188 Family ATYIDAE De Haan, 1849......................................... 188 Superfamily BRESILIOIDEA Calman, 1896................................ 188 Family ALVINOCARIDIDAE Christoffersen, 1986...................... 188 Family DISCIADIDAE Rathbun, 1902 ................................... 188 Superfamily NEMATOCARCINOIDEA Smith, 1884 ..................... 188 Family NEMATOCARCINIDAE Smith, 1884........................... 188 Family RHYNCHOCINETIDAE Ortmann, 1890....................... 189 Superfamily STYLODACTYLOIDEA Bate, 1888 .......................... 190 Family STYLODACTYLIDAE Bate, 1888 ............................... 190 Superfamily CAMPYLONOTOIDEA Sollaud, 1913 ....................... 190 Family CAMPYLONOTIDAE Sollaud, 1913 ............................ 190 Superfamily PALAEMONOIDEA Rafinesque, 1815 ....................... 190 Family PALAEMONIDAE Rafinesque, 1815 ............................. 190 Subfamily PALAEMONINAE Rafinesque, 1815 ....................... 190 Subfamily PONTONIINAE Kingsley, 1879............................ 190 Superfamily ALPHEOIDEA Rafinesque, 1815.............................. 191 Family ALPHEIDAE Rafinesque, 1815 ................................... 191 Family HIPPOLYTIDAE Dana, 1852 .................................... 192 Family OGYRIDIDAE Holthuis, 1955 ................................... 194 Superfamily PROCESSOIDEA Ortmann, 1896 ............................ 194 Family PROCESSIDAE Ortmann, 1896.................................. 194 Superfamily PANDALOIDEA Haworth, 1825.............................. 195 Family PANDALIDAE Haworth, 1825 ................................... 195 Superfamily CRANGONOIDEA Haworth, 1825 .......................... 196 Family CRANGONIDAE Haworth, 1825................................ 196 Family GLYPHOCRANGONIDAE Smith, 1884 ........................ 198 Infraorder ASTACIDEA Latreille, 1802 ............................................ 198 Superfamily NEPHROPOIDEA Dana, 1852 ............................... 198 Family NEPHROPIDAE Dana, 1852..................................... 198 Superfamily PARASTACOIDEA Huxley, 1879 ............................. 199 Family PARASTACIDAE Huxley, 1879................................... 199 Infraorder AXIIDEA de Saint Laurent, 1979 ....................................... 200 Family AXIIDAE Huxley, 1879............................................ 200 Family CALLIANASSIDAE Dana, 1852.................................. 200 Subfamily CALLIANASSINAE Dana, 1852............................ 200 Subfamily CALLICHIRINAE Manning & Felder, 1991 ............... 201 Subfamily VULCANOCALLIACINAE Dworschak & Cunha, 2007 .. 201 Family CALOCARIDIDAE Ortmann, 1891 ............................. 201 Family CTENOCHELIDAE Manning & Felder, 1991 .................. 201 Subfamily CTENOCHELINAE Manning & Felder, 1991 ............ 201 Family EICONAXIIDAE Sakai & Ohta, 2005 ........................... 201 Annotated checklist of New Zealand Decapoda (Arthropoda: Crustacea) 173 Infraorder GEBIIDEA de Saint Laurent, 1979 ..................................... 201 Family LAOMEDIIDAE Borradaile, 1903................................ 201 Family UPOGEBIIDAE Borradaile, 1903 ................................ 202 Infraorder ACHELATA Scholtz & Richter, 1995 .................................. 202 Family PALINURIDAE Latreille, 1802 ................................... 202 Family SCYLLARIDAE Latreille, 1825 ................................... 204 Subfamily ARCTIDINAE Holthuis, 1985.............................. 204 Subfamily IBACINAE Holthuis, 1985 .................................. 204 Subfamily SCYLLARINAE Latreille, 1825 ............................. 205 Infraorder POLYCHELIDA Scholtz & Richter, 1995.............................. 205 Family POLYCHELIDAE Wood-Mason, 1875 ........................... 205 Infraorder ANOMURA MacLeay, 1838 ............................................ 207 Superfamily CHIROSTYLOIDEA Ortmann, 1892 ........................ 207 Family CHIROSTYLIDAE Ortmann, 1892 .............................. 207 Family EUMUNIDIDAE A. Milne-Edwards & Bouvier, 1900 .......... 210 Superfamily GALATHEOIDEA Samouelle, 1819 .......................... 210 Family GALATHEIDAE Samouelle, 1819 ................................ 210 Family MUNIDIDAE Ahyong, Baba, Macpherson & Poore, 2010 ...... 211 Family MUNIDOPSIDAE Whiteaves, 1874.............................. 213 Family PORCELLANIDAE Haworth, 1825.............................. 214 Superfamily HIPPOIDEA Latreille, 1825 ................................... 215 Family ALBUNEIDAE Stimpson, 1858................................... 215 Superfamily LITHODOIDEA Samouelle, 1819 ............................ 215 Family LITHODIDAE Samouelle, 1819.................................. 215 Superfamily PAGUROIDEA Latreille, 1802 ................................ 217 Family DIOGENIDAE Ortmann, 1892 .................................. 217 Family PAGURIDAE Latreille, 1802...................................... 218 Family PARAPAGURIDAE Smith, 1882 ................................. 222 Family PYLOCHELIDAE Bate, 1888..................................... 224 Infraorder BRACHYURA Linnaeus, 1758 ......................................... 224 Section DROMIACEA De Haan, 1833 .......................................... 224 Superfamily DROMIOIDEA De Haan, 1833............................... 224 Family DROMIIDAE De Haan, 1833 .................................... 224 Family DYNOMENIDAE Ortmann, 1892 ............................... 225 Superfamily HOMOLODROMIOIDEA Alcock, 1900 .................... 225 Family HOMOLODROMIIDAE Alcock, 1900.......................... 225 Superfamily HOMOLOIDEA De Haan, 1839.............................. 226 Family HOMOLIDAE De Haan, 1839 ................................... 226 Family LATREILLIIDAE Stimpson, 1858 ................................ 227 Section RANINOIDA De Haan, 1839........................................... 227 Family RANINIDAE De Haan, 1839 ..................................... 227 Subfamily LYREIDINAE Guinot, 1993 ................................ 227 Subfamily RANINOIDINAE Lo˝renthey, 1929......................... 227 Section CYCLODORIPPOIDA Ortmann, 1892................................ 227 Family CYMONOMIDAE Bouvier, 1897 ................................ 227 174 Tuhinga, Number 22 (2011) Section EUBRACHYURA de Saint Laurent, 1980 .............................. 227 Subsection HETEROTREMATA Guinot, 1977............................... 227 Superfamily AETHROIDEA Dana, 1851 ................................... 227 Family AETHRIDAE Dana, 1851 ........................................ 227 Superfamily BELLIOIDEA Dana, 1852 ..................................... 228 Family BELLIIDAE Dana, 1852 .......................................... 228 Superfamily BYTHOGRAEOIDEA Williams, 1980........................ 228 Family BYTHOGRAEIDAE Williams, 1980 ............................. 228 Superfamily
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Classification of Living and Fossil Genera of Decapod Crustaceans
    RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009 Supplement No. 21: 1–109 Date of Publication: 15 Sep.2009 © National University of Singapore A CLASSIFICATION OF LIVING AND FOSSIL GENERA OF DECAPOD CRUSTACEANS Sammy De Grave1, N. Dean Pentcheff 2, Shane T. Ahyong3, Tin-Yam Chan4, Keith A. Crandall5, Peter C. Dworschak6, Darryl L. Felder7, Rodney M. Feldmann8, Charles H. J. M. Fransen9, Laura Y. D. Goulding1, Rafael Lemaitre10, Martyn E. Y. Low11, Joel W. Martin2, Peter K. L. Ng11, Carrie E. Schweitzer12, S. H. Tan11, Dale Tshudy13, Regina Wetzer2 1Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PW, United Kingdom [email protected] [email protected] 2Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90007 United States of America [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 3Marine Biodiversity and Biosecurity, NIWA, Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie Wellington, New Zealand [email protected] 4Institute of Marine Biology, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20224, Taiwan, Republic of China [email protected] 5Department of Biology and Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602 United States of America [email protected] 6Dritte Zoologische Abteilung, Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien, Austria [email protected] 7Department of Biology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504 United States of America [email protected] 8Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242 United States of America [email protected] 9Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, P. O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands [email protected] 10Invertebrate Zoology, Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, 10th and Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20560 United States of America [email protected] 11Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 12Department of Geology, Kent State University Stark Campus, 6000 Frank Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • National Monitoring Program for Biodiversity and Non-Indigenous Species in Egypt
    UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM MEDITERRANEAN ACTION PLAN REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTRE FOR SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS National monitoring program for biodiversity and non-indigenous species in Egypt PROF. MOUSTAFA M. FOUDA April 2017 1 Study required and financed by: Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas Boulevard du Leader Yasser Arafat BP 337 1080 Tunis Cedex – Tunisie Responsible of the study: Mehdi Aissi, EcApMEDII Programme officer In charge of the study: Prof. Moustafa M. Fouda Mr. Mohamed Said Abdelwarith Mr. Mahmoud Fawzy Kamel Ministry of Environment, Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA) With the participation of: Name, qualification and original institution of all the participants in the study (field mission or participation of national institutions) 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS page Acknowledgements 4 Preamble 5 Chapter 1: Introduction 9 Chapter 2: Institutional and regulatory aspects 40 Chapter 3: Scientific Aspects 49 Chapter 4: Development of monitoring program 59 Chapter 5: Existing Monitoring Program in Egypt 91 1. Monitoring program for habitat mapping 103 2. Marine MAMMALS monitoring program 109 3. Marine Turtles Monitoring Program 115 4. Monitoring Program for Seabirds 118 5. Non-Indigenous Species Monitoring Program 123 Chapter 6: Implementation / Operational Plan 131 Selected References 133 Annexes 143 3 AKNOWLEGEMENTS We would like to thank RAC/ SPA and EU for providing financial and technical assistances to prepare this monitoring programme. The preparation of this programme was the result of several contacts and interviews with many stakeholders from Government, research institutions, NGOs and fishermen. The author would like to express thanks to all for their support. In addition; we would like to acknowledge all participants who attended the workshop and represented the following institutions: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents Systematics ... Morphological Tenus ..............................................................2 Chirostylidae ...,......,..‘......... ，-且.， .. ,.. ····7 Chirostylus . .‘. ..............,.....,......,.,........,...................., 8 Chirostylus rostratus .,..,...............................,.,....,.......... 9 Eumunida ...................,.,.,.................,..............,'....., 11 Eumunida capillata ....................................,.....,.........., 12 Eumunida chani . ,............................................... 14 Eumunida depressa ......,.,...........,.....,..................,........ 16 Eumunida 戶 nambulus ,...... , . , . , . , . 18 b馴的也 macpherso 肘. , • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • ·21 Eumunida parva .......................... ,.....,................,...... ·23 Uropηchodes ..................,.,........................................25 Uroptychodes barμnae . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. , • ••• • ·26 Uroptychodes grα ndirostris .........‘. ,...................,., .. , .. ·········28 Uroptychodes spinimarginatus . ,...................,.........,......... 30 Uroptychus ..................................................,.......‘. ···32 Uroptychus anacα ena . ,............,....,................. 34 Uroptychus anatonus .. , ..........,...............,.,................... ·36 Uroptychμ s babai . ,..,.......,...... ................. .因. • • • , . ·38 Uroptychus bispinatus ........,..........................,....,........... 40 Uroptychus ciliatus ...,...........................................,.....
    [Show full text]
  • BIOPAPUA Expedition Highlighting Deep-Sea Benthic Biodiversity of Papua New- Guinea
    Biopapua Expedition – Progress report MUSÉUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE 57 rue Cuvier 75005 PARIS‐ France BIOPAPUA Expedition Highlighting deep-sea benthic Biodiversity of Papua New- Guinea Submitted by: Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle (MNHN) Represented by (co‐PI): Dr Sarah Samadi (Researcher, IRD) Dr Philippe Bouchet (Professor, MNHN) Dr Laure Corbari (Research associate, MNHN) 1 Biopapua Expedition – Progress report Contents Foreword 3 1‐ Our understanding of deep‐sea biodiversity of PNG 4 2 ‐ Tropical Deep‐Sea Benthos program 5 3‐ Biopapua Expedition 7 4‐ Collection management 15 5‐ Preliminary results 17 6‐ Outreach and publications 23 7‐ Appendices 26 Appendix 1 27 NRI, note n°. 302/2010 on 26th march, 2010, acceptance of Biopapua reseach programme Appendix 2 28 Biopapua cruise Report, submitted by Ralph MANA (UPNG) A Report Submitted to School of Natural and Physical Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea Appendix 3 39 Chan, T.Y (2012) A new genus of deep‐sea solenocerid shrimp (Crustacea: Decapoda: Penaeoidea) from the Papua New Guinea. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 32(3), 489‐495. Appendix 4 47 Pante E, Corbari L., Thubaut J., Chan TY, Mana R., Boisselier MC, Bouchet P., Samadi S. (In Press). Exploration of the deep‐sea fauna of Papua New Guinea. Oceanography Appendix 5 60 Richer de Forges B. & Corbari L. (2012) A new species of Oxypleurodon Miers, 1886 (Crustacea Brachyura, Majoidea) from the Bismark Sea, Papua New Guinea. Zootaxa. 3320: 56–60 Appendix 6 66 Taxonomic list: Specimens in MNHN and Taiwan collections 2 Biopapua Expedition – Progress report Foreword Biopapua cruise was a MNHN/IRD deep‐sea cruise in partnership with the School of Natural and Physical Sciences, University of Papua New Guinea.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity of Seagrass-Associated Decapod Crustaceans in a Tropical Reef Lagoon Prior to Large Environmental Changes: a Baseline Study
    diversity Article Diversity of Seagrass-Associated Decapod Crustaceans in a Tropical Reef Lagoon Prior to Large Environmental Changes: A Baseline Study Patricia Briones-Fourzán * , Luz Verónica Monroy-Velázquez, Jaime Estrada-Olivo y and Enrique Lozano-Álvarez Unidad Académica de Sistemas Arrecifales, Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico, Puerto Morelos, 77580 Quintana Roo, Mexico; [email protected] (L.V.M.-V.); [email protected] (J.E.-O.); [email protected] (E.L.-Á.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Current address: Calle Trasatlántico SM-18, Mz 24, Lote 12; Villas Morelos, Puerto Morelos, y 77580 Quintana Roo, Mexico. Received: 7 April 2020; Accepted: 19 May 2020; Published: 23 May 2020 Abstract: The community composition of decapods associated with subtidal tropical seagrass meadows was analyzed in a pristine reef lagoon on the Mexican Caribbean coast in the summer of 1995 and winter of 1998. The macrophyte community was dominated by Thalassia testudinum followed by Syringodium filiforme, with interspersed rhyzophytic macroalgae and large patches of drift algae. In each season, 10 one-min trawls were made with an epibenthic sled (mesh aperture 1 mm) during the day and 10 during the night on each of five sites. In all, 53,211 decapods belonging to 119 species were collected. The most diverse taxa were Brachyura and Caridea, but the most abundant were Caridea and Anomura. Dominance was high, with three species (Latreutes fucorum, Cuapetes americanus, and Thor manningi) accounting for almost 50% of individuals, and 10 species accounting for nearly 90% of individuals. There was great similarity in community composition and ecological indices between seasons, but significantly more individuals and species in night versus day samples.
    [Show full text]
  • Zootaxa,Crustacean Classification
    Zootaxa 1668: 313–325 (2007) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2007 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Crustacean classification: on-going controversies and unresolved problems* GEOFF A. BOXSHALL Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom E-mail: [email protected] *In: Zhang, Z.-Q. & Shear, W.A. (Eds) (2007) Linnaeus Tercentenary: Progress in Invertebrate Taxonomy. Zootaxa, 1668, 1–766. Table of contents Abstract . 313 Introduction . 313 Treatment of parasitic Crustacea . 315 Affinities of the Remipedia . 316 Validity of the Entomostraca . 318 Exopodites and epipodites . 319 Using of larval characters in estimating phylogenetic relationships . 320 Fossils and the crustacean stem lineage . 321 Acknowledgements . 322 References . 322 Abstract The journey from Linnaeus’s original treatment to modern crustacean systematics is briefly characterised. Progress in our understanding of phylogenetic relationships within the Crustacea is linked to continuing discoveries of new taxa, to advances in theory and to improvements in methodology. Six themes are discussed that serve to illustrate some of the major on-going controversies and unresolved problems in the field as well as to illustrate changes that have taken place since the time of Linnaeus. These themes are: 1. the treatment of parasitic Crustacea, 2. the affinities of the Remipedia, 3. the validity of the Entomostraca, 4. exopodites and epipodites, 5. using larval characters in estimating phylogenetic rela- tionships, and 6. fossils and the crustacean stem-lineage. It is concluded that the development of the stem lineage concept for the Crustacea has been dominated by consideration of taxa known only from larval or immature stages.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Monitoring of Glenelg Spiny Crayfish (Euastacus Bispinosus ) in Rising-Spring Habitats of Lower South East, South Australia
    Population monitoring of Glenelg Spiny Crayfish (Euastacus bispinosus ) in rising-spring habitats of lower south east, South Australia Nick Whiterod and Michael Hammer Aquasave Consultants, Adelaide May 2012 Report to Friends of Mt Gambier Area Parks (Friends of Parks Inc.) Citation Whiterod, N. and Hammer, M. (2012). Population monitoring of Glenelg Spiny Crayfish (Euastacus bispinosus ) in rising-spring habitats of lower south east, South Australia. Report to Friends of Mt Gambier Area Parks (Friends of Parks Inc.). Aquasave Consultants, Adelaide. p. 27. Correspondence in relation to this report contact Dr Nick Whiterod Aquasave Consultants Tel: +61 409 023 771 Email: [email protected] Photographs © N. Whiterod, O. Sweeney, D. Mossop and M. Hammer Cover (clockwise from top): underwater view of aquatic vegetation in the Ewens Pond system; female Glenelg Spiny Crayfish with eggs (in berry); and Glenelg Spiny Crayfish amongst aquatic vegetation. Disclaimer This report was commissioned by Friends of Mt Gambier Area Parks (Friends of Parks Inc.). It was based on the best information available at the time and while every effort has been made to ensure quality, no warranty express or implied is provided for any errors or omissions, nor in the event of its use for any other purposes or by any other parties. ii Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Methods ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Congolli (Pseudaphritis Urvillii) and Australian Salmon (Arripis Truttaceus and A
    Inland Waters and Catchment Ecology Diet and trophic characteristics of mulloway (Argyrosomus japonicus), congolli (Pseudaphritis urvillii) and Australian salmon (Arripis truttaceus and A. trutta) in the Coorong George Giatas and Qifeng Ye SARDI Publication No. F2015/000479-1 SARDI Research Report Series No. 858 SARDI Aquatics Sciences PO Box 120 Henley Beach SA 5022 September 2015 Giatas and Ye (2015) Diet of three fish species in the Coorong Diet and trophic characteristics of mulloway (Argyrosomus japonicus), congolli (Pseudaphritis urvillii) and Australian salmon (Arripis truttaceus and A. trutta) in the Coorong George Giatas and Qifeng Ye SARDI Publication No. F2015/000479-1 SARDI Research Report Series No. 858 September 2015 II Giatas and Ye (2015) Diet of three fish species in the Coorong This publication may be cited as: Giatas, G.C. and Ye, Q. (2015). Diet and trophic characteristics of mulloway (Argyrosomus japonicus), congolli (Pseudaphritis urvillii) and Australian salmon (Arripis truttaceus and A. trutta) in the Coorong. South Australian Research and Development Institute (Aquatic Sciences), Adelaide. SARDI Publication No. F2015/000479-1. SARDI Research Report Series No. 858. 81pp. South Australian Research and Development Institute SARDI Aquatic Sciences 2 Hamra Avenue West Beach SA 5024 Telephone: (08) 8207 5400 Facsimile: (08) 8207 5406 http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/research DISCLAIMER The authors warrant that they have taken all reasonable care in producing this report. The report has been through the SARDI internal review process, and has been formally approved for release by the Research Chief, Aquatic Sciences. Although all reasonable efforts have been made to ensure quality, SARDI does not warrant that the information in this report is free from errors or omissions.
    [Show full text]
  • Alpheopsis Harperi (DECAPODA: ALPHEIDAE): a NEW SPECIES of SNAPPING SHRIMP from TEXAS ^CVA LIB**** S^Xtttso^X^ ^ Mary K
    1 \)J \ C e Vs Northeast Gulf Science Vol. 7, No. 1, p. 97-100 July 1984 Alpheopsis harperi (DECAPODA: ALPHEIDAE): A NEW SPECIES OF SNAPPING SHRIMP FROM TEXAS ^CVA LIB**** S^XTttSO^X^ ^ Mary K. Wicksten RETURN Department of Biology, Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843 Abstract: Alpheopsis harperi new species is described from the coast off Freeport, Texas. The shrimp most closely resembles A. trispinosus (Stimpson), a pantropical species. Alpheop- sis harperi has a short rostrum, lacks carinae on the carapace, and has lamellate, toothless fingers of the chelae. Snapping shrimps (family with lamellate dactyl. Small cheliped Alpheidae) are common inhabitants of with 2 meral spines. Second pereopod both hard and soft bottoms in warm with 5 carpal articles. temperate and tropical waters. Species of soft bottoms (mud or sand) may bur- Description row into the sediment, where they are Rostrum triangular, slightly broader collected by grabs or box cores. than long, not reaching end of first seg- In 1981-83, divers off Freeport, Texas ment of antennular peduncle. Orbital collected specimens of an unusual, teeth small and sharp, not as long as small snapping shrimp. The animals rostrum. Pterygostomial angle of were taken in a 232 cm2 Ekman grab in carapace blunt. muddy sand with a thin covering of silt. Second segment of antennular All the specimens were broken. Donald peduncle longest. Statocyst present in Harper and Larry McKinney of Texas first segment of antennular peduncle. A&M University at Galveston sent the Stylocerite about as long as first seg- specimens to the main campus of the ment of antennular peduncle.
    [Show full text]
  • Part I. an Annotated Checklist of Extant Brachyuran Crabs of the World
    THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2008 17: 1–286 Date of Publication: 31 Jan.2008 © National University of Singapore SYSTEMA BRACHYURORUM: PART I. AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF EXTANT BRACHYURAN CRABS OF THE WORLD Peter K. L. Ng Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Kent Ridge, Singapore 119260, Republic of Singapore Email: [email protected] Danièle Guinot Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Département Milieux et peuplements aquatiques, 61 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France Email: [email protected] Peter J. F. Davie Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT. – An annotated checklist of the extant brachyuran crabs of the world is presented for the first time. Over 10,500 names are treated including 6,793 valid species and subspecies (with 1,907 primary synonyms), 1,271 genera and subgenera (with 393 primary synonyms), 93 families and 38 superfamilies. Nomenclatural and taxonomic problems are reviewed in detail, and many resolved. Detailed notes and references are provided where necessary. The constitution of a large number of families and superfamilies is discussed in detail, with the positions of some taxa rearranged in an attempt to form a stable base for future taxonomic studies. This is the first time the nomenclature of any large group of decapod crustaceans has been examined in such detail. KEY WORDS. – Annotated checklist, crabs of the world, Brachyura, systematics, nomenclature. CONTENTS Preamble .................................................................................. 3 Family Cymonomidae .......................................... 32 Caveats and acknowledgements ............................................... 5 Family Phyllotymolinidae .................................... 32 Introduction .............................................................................. 6 Superfamily DROMIOIDEA ..................................... 33 The higher classification of the Brachyura ........................
    [Show full text]
  • On a Hitherto Unknown Phyllosoma Larval Species of the Slipper Lobster Scyllarus (Decapoda, Scyllaridae) in the Hawaiian Archipelago L
    Pacific Science (1977), vol. 31, no. 2 © 1977 by The University Press of Hawaii. All rights reserved On a Hitherto Unknown Phyllosoma Larval Species of the Slipper Lobster Scyllarus (Decapoda, Scyllaridae) in the Hawaiian Archipelago l MARTIN W. JOHNSON 2 IN A PREVIOUS ANALYSIS of plankton from thorax has a short spine situated at the 140 scattered oceanographic stations in the base of each of legs 1-4 (Figure 1-2). Coxal Hawaiian area, mainly around Oahu Island, and subexopodal spines (Figure I-I, sp.) are six scyllarid larval species were found (John­ present and the exopods of legs I, 2, and 3 son 1971). Five ofthese species were assigned are provided with 21, 21, and 19 pairs of respectively to Parribacus antarcticus (Lund); swimming setae, respectively; pleopods and Scyllarides squamosus (H. Milne Edwards); uropods are bilobed buds (Figure 1-3). The Arctides regalis Holthuis; Scyllarus timidus eyestalks are 2.4 mm long and the first Holthuis; and Scyllarus modestus Holthuis. antennae are about equal in length to the These five species comprise all of the then slender second antennae (Figure 1-4). Only known adult slipper lobsters of the Hawaiian very rudimentary second maxillae and first area. The sixth larval species, a Scyllarus, maxillipeds are present and the second maxi1­ could not be identified specifically and lipeds bear no exopod buds (Figure 1-5). appears to represent an unknown adult species of that genus inhabiting the area. It is of interest to report here yet another unknown larva ofScyllarus that was probably Scyllarus sp. phyllosoma. Length 30.1 mm, produced in this relatively isolated oceanic final fully gilled stage (Figure 2-6).
    [Show full text]
  • Deep-Water Squat Lobsters (Crustacea: Decapoda: Anomura) from India Collected by the FORV Sagar Sampada
    Bull. Natl. Mus. Nat. Sci., Ser. A, 46(4), pp. 155–182, November 20, 2020 Deep-water Squat Lobsters (Crustacea: Decapoda: Anomura) from India Collected by the FORV Sagar Sampada Vinay P. Padate1, 2, Shivam Tiwari1, 3, Sherine Sonia Cubelio1,4 and Masatsune Takeda5 1Centre for Marine Living Resources and Ecology, Ministry of Earth Sciences, Government of India. Atal Bhavan, LNG Terminus Road, Puthuvype, Kochi 682508, India 2Corresponding author: [email protected]; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2244-8338 [email protected]; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6194-8960 [email protected]; http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2960-7055 5Department of Zoology, National Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo. 4–1–1 Amakubo, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305–0005, Japan. [email protected]; https://orcid/org/0000-0002-0028-1397 (Received 13 August 2020; accepted 23 September 2020) Abstract Deep-water squat lobsters collected during five cruises of the Fishery Oceanographic Research Vessel Sagar Sampada off the Andaman and Nicobar Archipelagos (299–812 m deep) and three cruises in the southeastern Arabian Sea (610–957 m deep) are identified. They are referred to each one species of the families Chirostylidae and Sternostylidae in the Superfamily Chirostyloidea, and five species of the family Munidopsidae and three species of the family Muni- didae in the Superfamily Galatheoidea. Of altogether 10 species of 5 genera dealt herein, the Uro- ptychus species of the Chirostylidae is described as new to science, and Agononida aff. indocerta Poore and Andreakis, 2012, of the Munididae, previously reported from Western Australia and Papua New Guinea, is newly recorded from Indian waters.
    [Show full text]