Published July 29, 2020 | Version v1
Taxonomic treatment Open

Calliopiidae G. O. Sars 1893

  • 1. Key Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China. & Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qingdao 266071, China. & College of Biological Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China.
  • 2. Key Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China. & College of Biological Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China.
  • 3. Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qingdao 266071, China. & Laboratory for Marine Biology and Biotechnology, Qingdao National Laboratory for Marine Science and Technology, Qingdao, China. & Center for Ocean Mega-Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qingdao 266071, China. & College of Biological Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China.
  • 4. Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Qingdao 266071, China.

Description

Identification key to genera of the Calliopiidae

Key based on original or amended descriptions of genera and adapted from previous keys given by Barnard (1964), Barnard & Karaman (1991) and Bousfield & Hendrycks (1997). All genera included in this key are according to Lowry & Myers (2013) and WoRMS (2020).

1. Mandibular molar not triturative, usually conical............................................................................ 2

– Mandibular molar triturative, columnar, rather conical.................................................................... 3

2. Carpus of gnathopods 1–2 shorter than propodus, weakly lobed; antenna 2 elongate...................................................................................................................................... Harpinioides Stebbing, 1888

– Carpus of gnathopods 1–2 as long as propodus, unlobed; antenna 1 elongate................................................................................................................................................. Calliopiurus Bushueva, 1986

3. Inner plate of maxilla 2 much broader than outer plate.................... Pontogeneoides Nicholls, 1938

– Inner plate of maxilla 2 not much broader than outer plate.............................................................. 4

4. Coxae very short and progressively longer towards coxa 7............................................................. 5

– Coxae not as greatly shortened and not progressively lengthened towards coxa 7.......................... 6

5. Carpus and propodus of pereopods 6–7 extremely elongate (planktonic); body carinate; coxa 1 not or scarcely produced anteriorly........................... Stenopleuroides Birstein & M. Vinogradov, 1964

– Carpus and propodus of pereopods 6–7 not extremely elongate; body smooth; coxa 1 produced anteriorly................................................................................................. Stenopleura Stebbing, 1888

6. Palp of maxilla 1 reduced, not exceeding apex of outer plate, article 1 longer than article 2...................................................................................................................................... Laothoes Boeck, 1871

– Palp of maxilla 1 ordinary, article 1 shorter than article 2................................................................ 7

7. Rami of uropods 1–2 without marginal robust setae, only with distal robust setae...................................................................................................................................... Calliopiella Schellenberg, 1925

– Rami of uropods 1–2 with both marginal and distal robust setae..................................................... 8

8. Gnathopods 2 very slender, linear, carpus very slender and elongate, unlobed, propodus generally elongate and linear (except in Amphithopsis)................................................................................... 9

– Gnathopod 2 not very slender nor linear nor greatly elongate (propodus not especially elongate)............................................................................................................................................................. 18

9. Gnathopod 1 ordinary, neither linear nor elongate......................................................................... 10

– Gnathopod 1 linear, elongate.......................................................................................................... 12

10. Propodus of gnathopod 2 not linear; dactylus of pereopods 3–7 serrated............................................................................................................................................................ Amphithopsis Boeck, 1861

– Propodus of gnathopod 2 linear; dactylus of pereopod 3–7 not serrated........................................11

11. Accessory flagellum absent; lower lip with inner lobe absent.............. Bouvierella Chevreux, 1900

– Accessory flagellum present; lower lip with inner lobe present................... Oradarea Walker, 1903

12. Dactylus of pereopods 3–7 with one or more superior robust setae............. Cleippides Boeck, 1871

– Dactylus of pereopods 3–7 without superior robust setae.............................................................. 13

13. Carpus of gnathopods 1–2 much longer than propodus................................................................. 16

– Carpus of gnathopods 1–2 scarcely longer and usually shorter than propodus.............................. 14

14. Gnathopod 2 much longer than gnathopod 1, carpus and propodus extremely slender like that of pereopod 3–7................................................................................... Leptamphopus G.O. Sars, 1893

– Gnathopod 2 as long as or slightly longer than ganthopod 1, carpus and propodus normal.......... 15

15. Telson entire, linguiform.................................................... Membrilopus Barnard & Karaman, 1987

– Telson with shallow apical notch on distal margin.................... Frigora Ren in Ren & Huang, 1991

16. Antennae calceolate; antenna 1, peduncular article 3 with posterodistal process; uropod3, rami margin only with simple setae....................................................................... Halirages Boeck, 1871

– Antennae usually lacking calceoli; antenna 1, peduncular article 3 unmodified; uropod 3, margins with robust setae and inner marginal setae only............................................................................. 17

17. Propodus of gnathopods expanded; pereopods 5–7 elongated........... Haliragoides G.O. Sars, 1893

– Propodus of gnathopods not expanded; pereopods 5–7 normal, not extremely elongated....................................................................................................................................... Apherusa Walker, 1891

18. Peduncular article 3 of antenna 1 produced apicoventrally............................................................ 19

– Peduncular article 3 of antenna 1 not or weakly produced apicoventrally..................................... 21

19. Carpus on either of gnathopods 1–2 much shorter than propodus................................................. 20

– Carpus on either of gnathopods 1–2 scarcely shorter than or longer than propodus............................................................................................................................................... Lopyastis Thurston, 1974

20. Carpus of gnathopods not lobate................................................................ Tylosapis Thurston, 1974

– Carpus of gnathopods strongly lobate..................................................... Calliopius Lilljeborg, 1865

21. Epimeron 3 serrate.......................................................................................................................... 22

– Epimeron 3 smooth......................................................................................................................... 23

22. Accessory flagellum well developed, 3+ articulate............................... Weygrechita Stuxberg, 1880

– Accessory flagellum scale-like............................................................... Oligochinus Barnard, 1969

23. Rostrum small................................................................................................................................. 24

– Rostrum large.................................................................................................................................. 27

24. Accessory flagellum absent............................................................................................................ 25

– Accessory flagellum 1-articulate, scale-like........ Paracalliopiella Tzvetkova & Kudrjaschov, 1975

25. Gnathopod 1 larger in size than gnathopod 2.................... Whangarusa Barnard & Karaman, 1987

– Gnathopod 1 similar in size to gnathopod 2................................................................................... 26

26. Carpus of gnathopods 1–2 much shorter than propodus; outer ramus of uropod 3 ½ length of inner ramus; telson longer than broad, entire.................................................................... Bathya gen. nov.

– Carpus of gnathopods 1–2 subequal to propodus; rami of uropod 3 subequal in length; telson broader than long, emarginated............................................... Lutriwita Lowry & Myers, 2012 (fresh water)

27. Dactylus of pereopods 3–7 bifid...................................... Manerogeneia Barnard & Karaman, 1987

– Dactylus of pereopods 3–7 pectinate......................................... Metaleptamphopus Chevreux, 1911

Notes

Published as part of Wang, Yan-Rong, Zhu, Chao-Dong, Sha, Zhong-Li & Ren, Xian-Qiu, 2020, Bathya brevicarpus gen. et sp. nov. (Amphipoda: Senticaudata: Calliopiidae), from hydrothermal vents, Okinawa Trough, North-west Pacific, pp. 1-12 in European Journal of Taxonomy 693 on pages 8-10, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2020.693, http://zenodo.org/record/3973339

Files

Files (9.8 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:e242fc2a04c4553fed913aade83d5c73
9.8 kB Download

System files (35.7 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:a7bb4e49517ce19279e0cbf1fd4a52b9
35.7 kB Download

Linked records

Additional details

Biodiversity

Family
Calliopiidae
Kingdom
Animalia
Order
Amphipoda
Phylum
Arthropoda
Scientific name authorship
G. O. Sars
Taxon rank
family
Taxonomic concept label
Calliopiidae Sars, 1893 sec. Wang, Zhu, Sha & Ren, 2020

References

  • Barnard J. L. 1964. Revision of some families, genera and species of Gammaridean Amphipoda. Crustaceana 7 (1): 49 - 74. https: // doi. org / 10.1163 / 156854064 X 00263
  • Barnard J. L. & Karaman G. S. 1991. The families and genera of marine gammaridean Amphipoda (except marine gammaroids). Records of the Australian Museum Supplement 13 (1 & 2): 1 - 866. Part 1: https: // doi. org / 10.3853 / j. 0812 - 7387.13.1991.91 Part 2: https: // doi. org / 10.3853 / j. 0812 - 7387.13.1991.367
  • Bousfield E. L. & Hendrycks E. A. 1997. The amphipod superfamily Eusiroidea in the North American Pacific Region. II. Family Calliopiidae. Systematics and distributional ecology. Amphipacifica 2 (3): 3 - 66.
  • Lowry J. K. & Myers A. A. 2013. A phylogeny and classification of the Senticaudata subord. nov. (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Zootaxa 3610 (1): 1 - 80. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3610.1.1
  • Ren X. & Huang L. 1991. Studies on gammaridea and caprellidea (Crustacea: Amphipoda) from the northwest waters off the Antarctic Peninsula. Studia Marina Sinica 32: 185 - 323. [in Chinese.]
  • Lowry J. K. & Myers A. A. 2012. New, mainly southern hemisphere, freshwater families of Amphipoda (Crustacea), together with a description of the first freshwater calliopiid, Lutriwita bradburyi gen. nov. et sp. nov. Zootaxa 3499: 27 - 45. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3499.1.2