Jourwul of’ M’icropalaeontolo~v,14: 59-65 0262-821 X/95 $07.00 0British Micropalaeontological Society. An annotated check-list of British Pleistocene, Holocene and modern freshwater ostracods H. I. GRIFFITHS’ & J. G. EVANS’ ‘Delpartmlent of Genetics, School of Biological Sciences. University of Leeds, Woodhouse Road, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK. ‘School of History & Archaeology, University of Wales College of Cardiff, PO Box 909, Cardiff CFI 3XU. UK. ABSTRACT - A revised check-list of British Pleistocene, Holocene and Kecent freshwater ostracods is given, and notes provided on the taxonomy and occurrence of some rare and newly-reported species. Stmocvpria ,fischeri (Lilljeborg. 1883) and the hypogean species Pseudocuntiona cf. eremito (Vecijvosky. 18x2) and Pseudocandoncr hrruili (Paris, 1920) arc reported from Britain for the first time. J. Micro,palawn/ol. 14( I): 59-65. April 1995. INTRODUCTION work accrued. Despite this, J. E. Robinson’s Pleistocene and Over recent years there has been renewed interest in Holocene studies continued to document ostracod faunas, as freshwater ostracods, particularly because of their potential occasionally have archaeological (e.g. Griffiths & Mount, in palaeolimnological and palaeohydrological studies (see 1993) and modern synecological works (e.g. Ham, 1982). reviews by Delorme, 1989; De Deckker & Forester, 1988: An updated check-list of freshwater Ostracoda was made Carbonel et a/. 1988; Holmes, in press). This increase in as part of the Institute of Terrestrial Ecology’s attempt to ecological interest has been accompanied by a spate of compile a complete listing of British freshwater animals taxonomic and systematic research that has done much to (Maitland, 1977). This was not based upon the work of a increase our understanding of evolutionary patterns and single individual, but gleaned from a variety of sources, processes in freshwater Ostracoda. Some freshwater largely without reappraisal. More recently, a new faunal ostracod lineages are evolutionarily dynamic, and diver- work on modern British freshwater ostracods has been gence within rhe Holocene has been demonstrated for at published as part of the Linnean Society’s ‘Synopses of the least onc cluster of lake-specific taxa (Martens, 1990). It is British Fauna’ series (Henderson, 1990). Unfortunately, this possible that the examination of ostracod valves in extended important benchmark was delayed in press for almost five lake corm (which often cover periods of several thousands years (Henderson, pers. comm.) and, as a result, over 30% of years) may prove to be a powerful tool to the of the specific and generic nomenclature used by Henderson evolutioi-iary biologist (Evans Rr Griffiths, 1993). However, had been superseded by the time of publication. The advances in ostracod palaeobiology do require continuity in undesirable result is a loss of continuity with current systematic nomenclature. European taxonomic usage (e.g. Wouters. 1989: Meisch et al. 1990). With the increasing interest in the group by both palaeoecologists and freshwater biologists, it seems timely to provide a check-list of the British species that includes not A BRIEF HISTORY OF BRITISH OSTRACOD only recent revisions, but also records of Recent species ST UDI E,:S omitted by Henderson (1990), plus a small number of Some of the key works in ostracod taxonomy were based on species that are thus far known only from Pleistocene and studies of the British and Irish faunas during the last Holocene contexts. century, notably through the work of G. S. Brady and colleagues (e.g. Brady & Robertson, 1869; Brady & NOTES ON SOME OF THE SPECIES Norman, 1889; Brady, 1910). As a result, comparatively Changes of generic assignation and specific nomenclature comprehcnsive check-lists of the faunas of both Britain have come about as the result of formal revisions, the details (Scourfield. 1904) and Ireland (Norman, 1905) were of which are beyond the scope of this account. Key works available within the first years of this century. Subsequently. include those of Broodbakker (1983), Carbonnel (1963, interest in native ostracod faunas waned, and scientific Colin & Danielopol (1980), Danielopol (1 978), Danielopol attention was turned to the description of species from & McKenzie (1977), Danielopol et al. (1989). Marmonier et overseas. Some workers continued to study British a/. (1989), Martens (1989, 1992) and Meisch (1984, 1985. freshwater species, notably P. F. Holmes, A. G. Lowndes, 1991). Some species do require additional comment. G. Fryer and H. M. Fox, however most had a broad interest however. in freshwater Crustacea, rathcr than a specific interest in Cyprirfopsis hamberi was originally described from a ostracods. Hence, prior to the 1980s. there were remarkably spring in Cornwall by Hendcrson (1986). Professor T. K. few published contributions, and no substantial body of Petkovski (pers. comm.) initially suggested the possible 59 Griffiths & Evans synonymy of C. hamheri with C. brincki Petkovski, 1963, air-dried material from Regent’s Park Lake, London (leg. J. described from wells in the Azores and also known from E. Robinson). The species is also known from British late Germany, Portugal and Macedonia (Petkovski; 1963). We Devensian and Holocene deposits as P. maculata Alm, 1914 examined type material of C. bamheri lodged in the (see list of synonyms in Meisch, 1985). collections of the Natural History Museum in London Eucypris elliptica. This is one of Britain’s less well-known (BMNH) and reached a similar conclusion. More recently, species; Henderson (1990) knew of no definite locations Petkovski et ul. (1993) have shown C. hrincki to be a junior for E. elliptica in the UK. In December 1990, we collected synonym of C. lusatica Shaffer, 1943, and the synonymy of two females from the shallows of Llangorse Lake in the C. humheri has been confirmed by Dr. C. Meisch of the Brecon Beacons National Park, Wales, and Professor D. Natural History Museum of Luxemburg (Meisch, pers. D. Williams has recently provided further specimens comm.). collected from the Island of Bardsey off the North Wales Eucypris anglicu was posthumously described as a British coast. endemic by Fox (1967) from sites in Buckinghamshire and Eucypris lilljeborgi. Again, Henderson (1990) knew of no Hertfordshire, but has since only been reported as a single definite records for this ‘exceedingly rare’ species, specimen from Hampshire (Ham, 1982). Syntypes are although E. cf. lilljeborgi had been reported from maintained in the BM(NH)’s Fox Collection (accession nos Holocene tufas (Preece & Robinson, 1984; Willing, 1985). 1967.4.3.1,2,3,4), the material consisting of four sealed We have since found E. lilljeborgi living in great numbers microscope slides bearing valves, two intact individuals, and in a run-off and rain-fed, grassy, seasonally-inundated intact specimens decalcified in potassium hydroxide. All are meadow adjacent to a Phrugmites-rich pond at Thornhill mounted in glycerine jelly or euparal. These specimens in Cardiff. Eucypris lilljehorgi first appears when the compare well with illustrated descriptions of E. crassa in habitat is inundated in October or November, and then Klie (1938) and Sywula (1974), although are a little larger seems to breed continuously until the site dries out in than usually cited (i.e. 2.2 mm). At our request, Professor T. early summer. The species rarely occurs in the reed beds K. Petkovski has re-examined material of E. anglica which border the inundated grasses, and males are absent. originally sent to him by Fox, and concluded that the species Carapace length is more variable than usually believed; we is indeed distinct. We therefore maintain E. anglica on the have collected gravid females ranging from 1.42-1.88 mm British list, although reinvestigation of ncw material of this long, although clearly identifiable as E. lilljeborgi on the species would be welcome. basis of soft-part anatomy. Ilyocypris hiplicata is well-known in Quaternary palaeon- Trajancypris serrata. There has been considerable confu- tology, and has been recorded in the modern faunas of sion over the taxonomic status of denticulate eucypridines. Canada (Delorme, 1970) and France (Meisch et ul., 1990). Some are assignable to Prionocypris serrata (Norman, The status of the species has long been the source of debate; 1861) of which we have modern and Holocene material Scourfield (1904) stated that 1. hiplicata was common in from the Test Valley, Hampshire. Martens (1 989) erected Britain, although it seems possible that he may have been genus Trajancypris to accommodate subclavate eucyprid- confused between I. biplicata and 1. gihha. Sywula (1974) ines with pronounced lists and selvages on the anterior lists 1. hiplicata as a subspecies of I. gihba. Palaeontologists inner margins, including Eucypris serrnta G. W. Miiller, have long accepted I. hiplicata (sensu Diebel & Pietrzeniuk, 1900 and E. clavata, the latter having often been recorded 1969: pl 7, figs 1-3), and Van Harten (1979) provides a from the Pleistocene as Sclerocypris? clavata prisca Diebel valve-based diagnosis of the species. Ilyocypris hiplicata is a & Pietrzeniuk, 1969. Because of the confusion over bland ilyocypridid, in which surface ornamentation is nomenclature, it now seems almost impossible to say with reduced. The carapace is sub-rectangular, posteriorally and confidence which denticulate eucypridine was actually anteriorally rounded, and with ventral and posterior margins meant by many earlier authors. Hence, we provisionally running almost parallel. In Britain the species has often maintain T. serruta in the British check-list, despite having been recorded at Pleistocene sites, and we have material seen neither subfossil or modern material. from Holocene deposits at West Overton in Wiltshire Paralimnocythere spp. There has been some confusion (Griffiths & Mount, 1993). As soft-part diagnosis remains over the correct specific assignation of non-Balkan species elusive (Meisch, 1988), it would seem that 1. gibha and I. of Paralimnocylhere, now resolved by Martens (1992). biplicata would benefit from examination by either Subfossil British material has usually been referred to P. molecular or genitalia-based taxonomic techniques (cf.