Published December 31, 2016 | Version v1
Taxonomic treatment Open

Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 (Tattersall 1925

Description

Genus Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 (Tattersall, 1925: 241)

Figures 29–31.

Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 (Tattersall, 1925: 241) — Schellenberg, 1931: 500.— Barnard & Barnard, 1983: 675 –676.— Bamber, 2003: 206.

Melita — Sawicki, Holsinger & Iliffe, 2005: 66.

Type species. Paraniphargus annandalei Tattersall, 1925: 242.

Species. Paraniphargus contains 8 species P. almagosa (Sawicki & Holsinger, 2005), P. annandalei Tattersall, 1925, P. cognata (Stock & Vonk, 1992), P. dulcicola (Stock & Vonk, 1990), P. latiflagella (Ren & Andress, 2008), P. oba (J.L. Barnard, 1972), P. ruttneri Schellenberg, 1931, P. valesi (Karaman, 1955).

Diagnosis (new composition). Body slender. Head, anterior and posterior lobes protruding, rounded, sinus developed, obsolescent or absent. Eyes present or absent. Pleon segments without dorsal teeth. Urosome segment 1 with or without dorsal tooth. Urosome segment 2 without or with paired dorsal teeth and / or spine groups. Antennae strong; antenna 1 longer than 2.

Mandible (Fig. 29 a–f), right lacinia spike-like, multidenticulate; left lacinia 4-dentate, molar seta present on both left and right mandibles; palp is short, medium reduced, 3-articulate, article 3 is subequal or slightly shorter to article 2, article 2 with single seta, article 3 with 1–4 setae only. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 29 g–l), outer plate with 9 apical strong setae; inner plate subquadratic, elongated, with truncated distal margin, only 3–4 setae located along the distal margin, not on the inner margin. Maxilla 2, inner plate without or with distal medial marginal setae only. Maxilliped plates strong; palp segment 2 sublinear; article 3 bilobed or with rounded protruding on the inner margin; dactyl stout, curved.

Coxae 1–4 (Figs. 29 m–p, s; 30b–d, g) medium, uniformly deep, rounded below. Pereopod 1 (gnathopod 1) of males (Fig. 29 n–s), basis anteriorly setose or with only single seta; carpus slender, sublinear or long-triangular; propodus shorter, anterior margin convex, palm usually slightly excavated at basal part or no, usually without protruding rounded lobe at the posterior part; dactylus thin, curved, is not bulging basally. Pereopod 1 of female (Fig. 29 m), carpus relatively deep, lower margin convex; palm of propodus oblique or transverse, dactylus regular. Pereopod 2 (gnthopod 2) of males (Fig. 30 a–g), basis without anterior long setae; carpus short, deep, length of posterior lobe about half anterior margin; palm regulary convex, oblique, without distinct palmar angle and palmar tooth, setose; dactyl relatively short. Pereopod 2 of female relatively small, carpus and propodus shallow, subequal in length or carpus shorter than propodus; palm oblique, nearly straight, without palmar corner tooth.

Pereopod 3 subequal to pereopod 4, dactylus medium size or short. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 30 l–q) larger than pereopod 5; coxae 5 and 6 distinctly anterolobate; coxae 6 of females (Fig. 30 h–k), anterior lobe forming a shallow lobate or gently curved hook-like processes; bases broadened proximally and narrowed distally, lower lobes usually absent. Pereopod 5–7, merus long, thin; margins of propodus with short stout setae; dactylus short.

Pleon plate 3, hind corner with small tooth or rectangular. Uropod 1 (Fig. 31 a–c), peduncle with interramal spur, rami subequal or outer ramus slightly shorter. Uropod 2, rami subequal or outer ramus short, margins with 1– 2 lateral strong setae “spinose” each. Uropod 3 (Fig. 31 d–h), inner ramus very small; outer ramus strong, about twice length of, and broader than peduncle, margins of segment 1 with up to 8 clusters of stout setae (“spines”), segment 2 short or vestigial or absent.

Telson (Fig. 31 i–o) lobes short, narrowing distally, inner margins without or with one short stout seta (“spine”), apices subacute, each with 2–3 strong stout setae, lateral notches absent.

Coxal gills on pereopods 2–5 medium large, oval or suboval; gill on pereopod 6 distinctly smaller, less broad. Distribution. Tropical and equatorial regions of Pacific, Indian and Atlantic Oceans. Fresh and coastal sea waters; subterranean and interstitial.

Relationships: The genus Paraniphargus has intermediate features between the genera Melita and Tegano: mandibular palp medium reduced, 3-articulated, article 3 with 1–4 setae only; coxae 6 of females, anterior lobe forming a shallow lobate or gently curved hook-like process.

Notes

Published as part of Labay, Vjacheslav S., 2016, Review of amphipods of the Melita group (Amphipoda: Melitidae) from the coastal waters of Sakhalin Island (Far East of Russia). III. Genera Abludomelita Karaman, 1981 and Melita Leach, 1814, pp. 1-73 in Zootaxa 4156 (1) on pages 61-63, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4156.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/257196

Files

Files (5.1 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:1f20008cdf1a2b44a6b5902c467e0ced
5.1 kB Download

System files (38.5 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:7452b48cc93a9ffe18a196292499c1c9
38.5 kB Download

Linked records

Additional details

Biodiversity

Family
Melitidae
Genus
Paraniphargus
Kingdom
Animalia
Order
Amphipoda
Phylum
Arthropoda
Scientific name authorship
Tattersall, 1925 (Tattersall
Taxon rank
genus
Taxonomic concept label
Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 sec. Labay, 2016

References

  • Tattersall, W. M. (1925) Freshwater Amphipoda from the Andaman Isles. Records of the Indian Museum, 27, 241 - 247.
  • Schellenberg, A. (1931) Amphipoden der Sunda-Expeditionen Thienemann und Rensch. Archiv fuer Hydrobiologie, 8 (Supplement), 493 - 511.
  • Barnard, J. L. & Barnard, C. M. (1983) Freshwater Amphipoda of the World. Vol. I. Hayfield Associates, Virginia, 830 pp.
  • Bamber, R. N. (2003) New species of Amphipoda from Hong Kong shores. In: Proceedings of an International Workshop Reunion Conference: Perspectives on Marine Environment Change in Hong Kong and Southern China, 1977 - 2011. Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong, 195 - 207.
  • Sawicki, T. R., Holsinger, J. R. & Iliffe, T. M. (2005) New species of amphipod crustaceans in the genera Tegano and Melita (Hadzioidea: Melitidae) from subterranean groundwaters in Guam, Palau, and the Philippines. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 25 (1), 49 - 74. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.1651 / C- 2525
  • Stock, J. H. & Vonk, R. (1992) The first freshwater amphipod (Crustacea) from the Cape Verde Islands: Melita cognata n. sp., with notes on its evolutionary scenario. Journal of African Zoology, 106, 273 - 280.
  • Stock, J. H. & Vonk, R. (1990) Stygofauna of the Canary Islands, 23. A freshwater amphipod from La Gomera, Melita dulcicola n. sp. Annals Limnology, 26 (1), 29 - 37. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.1051 / limn / 1990003
  • Karaman, S. (1955) Uber einige Amphipoden des Grundwassers der Jugoslavischen Meereskuste. Acta Musei Macedonici scientiarum naturalium, 2 (11), 223 - 242.