Raphidopus indicus Henderson, 1893

Osawa, Masayuki & Ng, Peter K. L., 2018, A new species of the genus Raphidopus Stimpson, 1858 (Crustacea: Decapoda: Anomura: Porcellanidae) from Peninsular Malaysia, with additional records of R. johnsoni Ng & Nakasone, 1994 from Sou, Zootaxa 4433 (1), pp. 111-126: 112-114

publication ID


publication LSID


persistent identifier


treatment provided by


scientific name

Raphidopus indicus Henderson, 1893


Raphidopus indicus Henderson, 1893 

( Figs. 1View FIGURE 1, 2View FIGURE 2, 9AView FIGURE 9)

Raphidopus indicus Henderson, 1893: 427  , pl. 39, figs. 19–22 (type locality: Madras, India).— OsaWa & McLaUghlin 2010: 115 (list).

Not Raphidopus indicus  .— Haig 1966: 62, fig. 6 (= R. persicus Ng, Safaie & Naser, 2012  ).— Haig 1981: 275 (= R. Johnsoni Ng & Nakasone, 1994  ).—Ng & Nakasone 1994: 7, fig. 3 (= R. brevipes  n. sp.).

Type material. Holotype: NHM 1892.7View Materials.15.246, male (cl 6.5 mm), Madras , India. 

Description. Carapace ( Fig. 1AView FIGURE 1) 1.4 times as broad as long; gastric and cardiac regions with scattered, Very short, weak striae; branchial regions with interrupted, short ridges of small, low tubercles anteriorly and long, tuberculate ridges posteriorly; branchial margins narrowly laminar, each with row of small, rounded tubercles (those on median margin larger). Rostrum ( Fig. 1BView FIGURE 1) trilobate, with median lobe distinctly exceeding leVel of apices of lateral lobes.

Third thoracic sternite ( Fig. 1CView FIGURE 1) 4.6 times broader than long measured along midline.

Telson ( Fig.1DView FIGURE 1) distinctly broader than long, with each posterior plate broader than long.

Eyes ( Fig. 1A, FView FIGURE 1) small, not exceeding lateral limits of orbits.

Basal article of antennular peduncle ( Fig. 1EView FIGURE 1) approximately as long as broad.

Antennal peduncle ( Fig. 1FView FIGURE 1) slender. First article approximately equal in length to combined second to fourth articles. Third article elongate rectangular, about 1.5 times longer than second.

Third maxilliped ( Fig. 1GView FIGURE 1) moderately stout, nearly smooth on lateral surface. Merus with rounded lobe proximal to median part of Ventral margin. Propodus moderately slender. Exopod about 0.8 width of ischium.

Chelipeds ( Fig. 2A–GView FIGURE 2) somewhat unequal in size. Merus with strong slender spine (larger) or unarmed (smaller) on Ventro-anterior margin. Carpus 1.9 (larger cheliped) –2.0 (smaller cheliped) times as long as broad; dorsal surface with short rows of small tubercles entirely and with single, flattened tubercles distally, no blunt ridge on longitudinal midline; posterior margin unarmed, rounded entirely. Chela about 2.9 times longer than broad; dorsal surface with coarse, small tubercles; cutting edge of fixed finger with row of small rounded teeth and large blunt teeth on proximal and distal parts (larger) and with row of small, low teeth (smaller). Dactylus 0.5 length of chela; cutting edge with row of small, low, rounded teeth and large proximal tooth, median margin slightly eleVated (larger) and with row of small, low teeth (smaller).

Ambulatory legs ( Fig. 1H–JView FIGURE 1) comparatiVely slender, lateral surface nearly smooth. Meri 3.6, 3.7, 2.9 times longer than high on respectiVe second to fourth pereopods. Carpi relatiVely slender. Propodi 3.4, 3.0, 2.7 times longer than high on respectiVe second to fourth pereopods. Dactyli 0.8 length of propodi.

Coloration. Not recorded.

Distribution. Known only from Madras (= present day Chennai), southeastern India ( Henderson 1893).

Habitat. Not recorded.

Remarks. The holotype of R. indicus  currently ( Fig. 9AView FIGURE 9) lacks the left second and third pereopods, although they were originally illustrated by Henderson (1893: fig. 19); it does not haVe many setae on the carapace and appendages. It appears that most setae on the holotype were either lost or decreased with time and preserVation as congeners are typically more setose (cf. Osawa & Chan 2010; Ng et al. 2012; present study, Fig. 9B–FView FIGURE 9).

In addition to Henderson’s (1893) record from Madras (= present day Chennai), India, R. indicus  has been recorded from Iran ( Haig 1966), “Indo-Chinese Sea” (= probably South China Sea) and Indonesia ( Haig 1981), and Peninsular Malaysia (Ng & Nakasone 1994). HoweVer, Ng et al. (2012) showed that Haig’s (1966) material from the Persian Gulf belonged to a new species, R. persicus  . The present comparison of the holotype of R. indicus  with Haig’s (1981) and Ng & Nakasone’s (1994) specimens also shows that the latter specimens are not R. indicus  but actually R. johnsoni  or R. brevipes  n. sp. Raphidopus indicus  is known only by the holotype at present, and it more closely resembles R. johnsoni  rather than R. brevipes  n. sp., as discussed below in the Remarks of the new species.














Raphidopus indicus Henderson, 1893

Osawa, Masayuki & Ng, Peter K. L. 2018


Raphidopus indicus

Henderson, 1893 : 427 OsaWa & McLaUghlin 2010 : 115


Raphidopus indicus

Haig 1966 : 62 Haig 1981 : 275 Nakasone 1994 : 7