REDESCRIPTION OF ATYAEPHYRA DESMARESTII (MILLET, 1831) (DECAPODA, CARIDEA, ATYIDAE) BASED ON TOPOTYPICAL SPECIMENS

BY

CH. ANASTASIADOU1,3), M.-S. KITSOS2) and A. KOUKOURAS2) 1) Department of Biological Applications and Technology, School of Sciences and Technology, University of Ioannina, GR-451 10, Ioannina, Greece 2) Department of Zoology, School of Biology, Aristoteleio University of Thessaloniki, GR-541 24, Thessaloniki, Greece

ABSTRACT The freshwater shrimp, Atyaephyra desmarestii (Millet, 1831) is redescribed on the basis of a topotypical population (Toulouse). Its original description by Millet (1831) is very short and inadequate. Concerning populations from the same area, no further descriptive information has been actually given. Specimens studied from a Belgian population (Ombret) did not show any important differences from the French ones.

RÉSUMÉ La crevette d’eau douce Atyaephyra desmarestii (Millet, 1831) est re-décrite sur la base d’une population topotypique (Toulouse). Sa description originale par Millet (1831) est très courte et peu adéquate. Aucune autre information descriptive n’a été proposée récemment pour les populations de la même zone d’étude. L’étude de spécimens provenant d’une population belge (Ombret) n’a montré aucune différence importante avec les individus d’origine française.

INTRODUCTION Atyaephyra desmarestii (Millet, 1831) has originally been described from Toulouse (rivers: , , , Thouet, and Layon), , by Millet (1831) as Hyppolyte Desmarestii. This description is very short and inadequate, giving only general descriptive information concerning the rostrum, antennae, eyes, carapace, pleonites, and third maxillipeds, as well as information on the eggs of an ovigerous female. Concerning populations from the same area, no

3) Corresponding author; e-mail through: [email protected] © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2006 Crustaceana 79 (10): 1195-1207 Also available online: www.brill.nl/cr 1196 CH. ANASTASIADOU, M.-S. KITSOS & A. KOUKOURAS further descriptive information has been actually given. Furthermore, although the authors tried to find out, by asking French colleagues, if the holotype of the species described by Millet is still extant, their efforts failed. According to Bouvier (1913), H. Milne-Edwards (1837) accepted that Millet’s (1831) species is a Hippolyte, although he recognized an affinity with the genus Caridina, while Joly (1843) named his material from Toulouse (France), Caridina Desmarestii. Brito Capello (1867) describing a new species from Portugal, named it Atyaephyra Rosiana and he established for the first time the genus Atyaephyra, in which “Hyppolite Desmarestii Millet, 1831” was also classified (e.g., Bouvier, 1913). The aim of this study is based on the suggestion of Anastasiadou et al. (2004) that a detailed examination of the various populations of Atyaephyra desmarestii (Millet, 1831) over their distributional area will reveal the existence of different species. CL stands for carapace length; RL is rostrum length.

SYSTEMATICS Atyaephyra desmarestii (Millet, 1831) (figs. 1, 2a-e, 3a-g, 4a-f, 5a-e) Hyppolyte Desmarestii Millet, 1831: 56 [Toulouse, France]. Caridina Desmarestii, Joly, 1843: 34 [Toulouse?, France].  Atyaephyra Desmaresti (Millet, 1831) variation occidentalis, Bouvier, 1913: 72, fig. 3J ,inpart [Bretagne, France]. Atyaephyra Desmaresti (Millet, 1831) variation occidentalis, Bouvier, 1925: 87, in part. Material examined. — France, Garonne River, Merville, 20 km from Toulouse, depth 2-30 cm, among aquatic plants and roots, 25.viii.2004: 64 males and 101 females (77 ovigerous); Belgium, Ombret, 03.vii.1979: 12 males and 31 females (4 ovigerous). Description. — Rostrum rather slender, wide medially, always shorter than the carapace, overreaching antennular peduncle; failing to reach end of scaphocerite; it is straight (fig. 1) and sometimes directed slightly downwards; about 3 to 7 times as long as wide. The upper margin bears 23 to 28 teeth, 2 to 4 of which are placed on the carapace behind the orbit; these teeth are evenly spaced along the upper margin, leaving only a short, unarmed space behind the tip. The lower margin bears 5 to 10 teeth situated in the distal half of the rostrum, leaving only a short distal part of the lower border unarmed. The mediolateral carina is well developed. The carapace is smooth, with supraorbital and antennal spines (fig. 1). The lower angle of the orbit is slightly produced. A very faint postorbital margin is present, ending at the lower angle of the orbit. The supraorbital and antennal spines are well developed. The supraorbital spine is located just above the orbit, at the posterior end of the carina, and the antennal spine is located close to the lower angle of the