Published October 17, 2017 | Version v1
Taxonomic treatment Open

Epimeria (Hoplepimeria) robusta d'Acoz & Verheye 2017, subgen. nov.

  • 1. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Service Heritage, Rue Vautier 29, B- 1000 Brussels, Belgium. & Corresponding author: cdudekem @ naturalsciences. be
  • 2. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Operational direction Taxonomy and Phylogeny, Rue Vautier 29, B- 1000 Brussels, Belgium. & Email: mverheye @ naturalsciences. be

Description

Epimeria (Hoplepimeria) robusta subgen. nov. K.H. Barnard, 1930

Figs 209–211

Epimeria robusta K.H. Barnard, 1930: 375, figs 40a, 41.

Epimeria inermis – Walker 1907: 23, pl. 8 fig. 13.

Epimeria robusta – Gurjanova 1955: 198. — J.L. Barnard 1961: 103 (key). — McCain 1971: 161. — De Broyer & Klages 1991: 164 (key, in part). — Coleman 1994: 560, in part, fig. 5C only.; 1998b: 223 (in part) — Wakabara & Serejo 1999: 643 (key). — Lörz et al. 2009: 16, figs 6–9. — Lörz & Coleman 2009: 17, unnumbered photograph.

‘Clade G robusta-robustoides complex - R03’ – Verheye et al. 2016a, supplement: 4 (online).

non Epimeria inermis Walker, 1903: 54, pl. 10 fig. 69.

non Epimeria robusta – Klages & Gutt 1990: 73, fig. 1A, 4A–D (= Epimeria (Hoplepimeria) robustoides subgen. nov. Lörz & Coleman in Lörz et al., 2009).

Material examined

RV Seatruck cruises:

SOUTHERN OCEAN: 1 ♀, cruise REVOLTA I, stn REVO-043, Collect_ID: 436, Adélie Coast, 66°38ʹ28″ S, 140°01ʹ50″ E, 85–86 m, 26 Jan. 2010, coll. M. Eléaume, L. Hemery and A. D’Hont (MNHN-IU- 2009-2571) [extraction K1; Genbank nr, COI: KU870854, 28S: KU759631].

Description

ROSTRUM. Medium-sized, nearly reaching tip of article 1 of peduncle of antenna 1, anteriorly straight, ventrally straight, narrow and subacute in lateral view; of medium width and with weakly curved converging borders in frontal view.

EYE. Very large, narrowly elliptic.

PEREION–PLEOSOME TOOTH PATTERN. Pereionites 1–7 smooth; pereionite 7 dorsally scarcely carinate; pleonite 1 with weak, straight mid-dorsal carina; pleonite 2 with weak straight mid-dorsal carina, posteriorly simply angulate but not forming a tooth; pleonite 3 dorsally weakly carinate with median extremely low (inconspicuous) rounded lobe, followed by inconspicuous concavity, terminated by a narrow but blunt-tipped tooth directed upwards.

COXAE 1–3. Not carinate, apically blunt.

COXA 4. Anterodorsal border very weakly sigmoid, anteroventral border straight, these two borders being joined by very broad, blunt but very distinct squared angle (anterior corner), which is slightly projecting forward; ventral corner forming an obtuse sharp angle (ventral projection short and fairly broad); lateral carina absent; posteroventral border straight.

COXA 5. Broad, with surface smooth, with posterior border straight, with posteroventral corner forming a very blunt tooth (shape: acute triangle) projecting backwards and not laterally (no tooth or corner visible in dorsal view).

COXA 6. With posterior border straight, with posteroventral corner forming a blunt tooth (shape: narrow acute triangle) projecting backwards and not laterally (no tooth or corner visible in dorsal view).

COXA 7. Posteriorly very weakly rounded.

EPIMERAL PLATES 1–3. Posteroventral angle: angulate in plate 1, produced into a medium-sized tooth in plates 2–3.

UROSOME TOOTH PATTERN. Urosomite 1 with well developed blunt-tipped process of which the anterior border is distinctly concave and the posterior border is nearly straight; urosomite 3 with dorsolateral borders distinctly concave and posteriorly produced into a sharp triangular tooth.

TELSON. Cleft on 0.15; tips of lobes triangular and blunt, notch very broadly V-shaped and blunt at its deepest point.

GNATHOPODS 1–2. Carpus and propodus very broad; propodus expanding distally, palm distinct.

PEREIOPODS 5–7. Merus, carpus and propodus fairly broad; dactylus small, normally curved, with unguis normally developed; basis of pereiopods 5–6 broad, with posteroproximal process present, swordlike, projecting obliquely, with posterodistal corner produced into a subacute to sharp triangular tooth projecting obliquely backwards; basis of pereiopod 7 broad; posterior border with proximal 0.4 weakly rounded, with distal 0.6 deeply concave, with posterodistal corner forming a sharp triangular tooth projecting obliquely backwards.

Colour pattern

Body and coxae either yellowish, sometimes with two pairs of small yellowish spots transversally ordered on some body segments or alternatively pale yellowish with a few tiny dark dots; pereiopods and mouthparts often tinged with pink; eyes red (Lörz et al. 2009: 111, fig. 10 B–D).

Body length

Up to 43 mm.

Distribution

Adélie Coast to western Ross Sea, 85–814 m (Lörz et al. 2009; present material).

Biology

K.H. Barnard (1930) found epicaridean isopods in the marsupium of E. robusta.

Remarks

Epimeria robusta s. str. is known from Adélie Coast and the western Ross Sea. Records from the Weddell Sea and the Scotia Region are based on its close relatives E. robustoides and E. gargantua sp. nov.

Epimeria robusta can be easily distinguished from its relatives by the dentition of its pleosome (see key of Hoplepimeria subgen. nov. species).

Notes

Published as part of d'Acoz, Cédric d'Udekem & Verheye, Marie L., 2017, Epimeria of the Southern Ocean with notes on their relatives (Crustacea, Amphipoda, Eusiroidea), pp. 1-553 in European Journal of Taxonomy 359 on pages 97-99, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2017.359, http://zenodo.org/record/3855694

Files

Files (5.7 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:bbd6ebd960e74194e2cfee603a7a00f9
5.7 kB Download

System files (30.6 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:76cf36f76e559fd18a2060c972eedfcc
30.6 kB Download

Linked records

Additional details

Biodiversity

Family
Epimeriidae
Genus
Epimeria
Kingdom
Animalia
Order
Amphipoda
Phylum
Arthropoda
Scientific name authorship
d'Acoz & Verheye
Species
robusta
Taxonomic status
subgen. nov.
Taxon rank
species
Taxonomic concept label
Epimeria (Hoplepimeria) robusta d'Acoz & Verheye, 2017

References

  • Barnard K. H. 1930. Crustacea. Part XI. Amphipoda. British Antarctic (" Terra Nova ") Expedition, 1910. Natural History Report, Zoology 8 (4): 307 - 454. Available from http: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / item / 195187 # page / 7 / mode / 1 up [accessed 12 Sep. 2017].
  • Walker A. O. 1907. Crustacea. III. Amphipoda. National Antarctic Expedition 1901 - 1904. Natural History 3. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 18281
  • Gurjanova E. F. 1955. New species of gammarideans (Amphipoda, Gammaridea) from the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. Trudy Zoologicheskogo Instituta Leningrad 18: 166 - 218 [in Russian].
  • Barnard J. L. 1961. Gammaridean Amphipoda. Galathea Report 5: 23 - 128. Available from http: // www. zmuc. dk / inverweb / Galathea / Pdf _ filer / Volume _ 05 / galathea-vol. 05 - pp _ 023 - 128. pdf [accessed 27 Sep. 2016].
  • McCain J. C. 1971. A new deep-sea species of Epimeria (Amphipoda, Paramphithoidae) from Oregon. Crustaceana 20 (2): 159 - 166. https: // doi. org / 10.1163 / 156854069 X 00187
  • De Broyer C. & Klages M. 1991. A new Epimeria (Crustacea, Amphipoda, Paramphithoidae) from the Weddell Sea. Antarctic Science 3 (2): 159 - 166. https: // doi. org / 10.1017 / S 0954102091000196
  • Coleman C. O. 1994. A new Epimeria species (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Epimeriidae) and redescriptions of three other species in the genus from the Antarctic Ocean. Journal of Natural History 28 (3): 555 - 576. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222939400770251
  • Wakabara Y. & Serejo C. S. 1999. Amathillopsidae and Epimeriidae (Crustacea, Amphipoda) from bathyal depths off the Brazilian coast. Zoosystema 21 (4): 625 - 645.
  • Lorz A. - N. & Coleman O. 2009. Living gems: jewel-like creatures from the deep. Water & Atmosphere 17 (1): 16 - 17. Available from https: // www. niwa. co. nz / sites / niwa. co. nz / files / import / attachments / gems. pdf [accessed 27 Sep. 2016].
  • Verheye M., Backeljau T. & d'Udekem d'Acoz C. 2016 a. Looking beneath the tip of the iceberg: diversification of the genus Epimeria on the Antarctic shelf (Crustacea, Amphipoda). In: Gutt J., David B. & Isla E. (eds) High environmental variability and steep biological gradients in the waters off the northern Antarctic Peninsula. Polar Biology 39 (5): 925 - 945, online supplementary material https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / s 00300 - 016 - 1910 - 5
  • Walker A. O. 1903. Amphipoda of the " Southern Cross " Antarctic Expedition. Journal of the Linnean Society of London, Zoology 29: 38 - 64, pls 7 - 11. http: // biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 31597966 [accessed 27 Sep. 2016].
  • Klages M. & Gutt J. 1990. Comparative studies on the feeding behaviour of high Antarctic amphipods (Crustacea) in laboratory. Polar Biology 11 (1): 73 - 79. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / BF 00236524