Vibilia borealis Bate and Westwood, 1868: 524–526, text fig. — Bovallius 1887c: 57–58, text fig. Norman 1900: 137. Behning 1913b: 215–216. Stephensen 1923: 11–12. Schellenberg 1927: 615–616, fig. 24. Pirlot 1929: 94–95. Stephensen 1929: 42, fig. 13.2. Pirlot 1930: 10. Stephensen 1932a: 375. Grice & Hart 1962: 300. Vinogradov et al. 1982: 219–221, fig. 108. Barkhatov & Vinogradov 1988: 167, 168 (Table). Barkhatov et al. 1999: 808 (Table). Vinogradov 1990a: 56.
Vibilia kroeyeri Bovallius, 1887a: 8. — Bovallius 1887b: 555. Bovallius 1887c: 58–60, pl. 8, figs 18–25. Behning 1913b: 216.
Vibilia kroyeri — Stephensen 1918: 38–40, fig. 10 (part), 11, chart 5. Chevreux 1935: 174. Madin & Harbison 1977: 453 (table), 455.
Type material
The only likely type material of V. borealis in the BMNH is a specimen from the Norman collection (11,719–20) labelled “cotypes”. The designation of “ type ” by Norman is suspect as there are many instances in the Norman Collection of material labelled as “types’ which was collected after the species name was published (see also Thurston & Allen 1969). The type locality is the North Sea, off Banff, Scotland.
Type material of synonyms
The types of V. kroeyeri could not be located at the SMNH, ZMUC or in Uppsala and are considered lost. However, Stephensen (1923) mentions two specimens in the ZMUC which he believes might be types, marked “ V. borealis B&B?”, but these could not be located. The synonymy of V. kroeyeri has been confirmed by the examination of specimens in museum collections labelled either V. borealis or V. kroeyeri.
Material examined (65 specimens)
North Atlantic: 25 lots (ZMUC), several lots (USNM), 40 specimens. South Atlantic: 1 lot (ZMUC), 3 specimens. Mediterranean: 1 lot (ZMH), 1 lot (ZMUC), 11 specimens. Central IndoPacific: 1 lot (USNM), 11 specimens.
Diagnosis
Body length up to 13 mm, but usually 6–7 mm. Antennae 1 as long as head and first two pereonites in males, slightly less in females; flagellum oval, distal margin rounded. Head with anterior margin forming a vertical or rounded projection above the base of A1; more prominent in males. Gnathopod 2; carpal process slightly longer than half of propodus. Pereopods 3 & 4; dactylus length about 0.3–0.4x propodus. Pereopods 5 & 6; dactylus length about 0.2x propodus. Pereopod 7; basis rectangular, width about 0.8x length, slightly shorter than ischium to carpus combined, with slight rounded posterodistal lobe barely overlapping ischium. Lateral corners of last urosomite not produced. Uropod 3; peduncle distinctly longer than rami; sexual dimorphism of endopod not evident. Telson roundishtriangular, length about half peduncle of U3.
Remarks
This species is very similar to V. jeangerardi, but differs in the head shape, the relatively longer first antennae, the relatively longer dactylus of pereopods 3–6, the relatively narrower articles of pereopods 5 and 6, and the slightly more triangular telson.
The figures and description of Bate and Westwood (1868) are insufficient to characterise the species, but Norman (1900), who apparently had some specimens from Bate and Westwood, concluded that it was the same as V. kroeyeri, which had been adequately described and figured by Bovallius (1887c).
Vibilia borealis, like the preceding species, has been recorded in association with Salpa maxima (Madin & Harbison 1977).
Distribution
This species has a similar distribution pattern to V. jeangerardi, but is more common in the North Atlantic Ocean (up to 60°N), whereas V. jeangerardi is more common in the Mediterranean Sea. It has also been recorded from the southeastern Pacific Ocean, off the northwest coast of South America (Vinogradov 1990a), and near New Zealand (Vinogradov et al. 1982). The record of Pirlot (1930) from the Sulu and Molucca Sea, near the Philippines, and the specimens examined from the USNM may represent a misidentification, as V. borealis seems to prefer colder waters, although the Galathea collected three specimens from the tropical southeastern Atlantic (4º00’S, 8º25’E).