Inconnivus, Błażewicz-Paszkowycz & Bamber, 2012

Błażewicz-Paszkowycz, M. & Bamber, R. N., 2012, The Shallow-water Tanaidacea (Arthropoda: Malacostraca: Peracarida) of the Bass Strait, Victoria, Australia (other than the Tanaidae), Memoirs of Museum Victoria 69, pp. 1-235 : 157

Genus Inconnivus gen. nov.

Diagnosis, female. Tanaellid with cephalothorax showing lateral concavity towards anterior. Eyelobes present. Antennule with four articles, antenna with six articles, proximal article fused to cephalothorax; second and third articles with slender dorsodistal spines. Mandibular pars molaris longer than pars incisiva, with distal ring or spines, longer ventrally. Pereopods, chelipeds, maxillipeds with microtrichia; merus and carpus of all pereopods with spines. Dactylus and unguis of pereopods distinct, as long as or longer than propodus; distal propodal spine of pereopods 2 and 3 coaxial with dactylus. Pleopods present. Uropods stout, exopod present as small process fused to basis; endopods short, the two not configured in the form of “pincers”.

Type species. Inconnivus billibunteri sp. nov. by monotypy.

Etymology. from the Latin “that does not close the eyes”, alluding to the presence of distinct eyelobes in a taxon otherwise hardly distinct from the eyelobe-less genus Tanaella Norman and Stebbing, 1886 ; noun derived from the adjective, male.

Remarks. With the anterolateral concavity to the cephalothorax, the conformation of the antennules, antennae, pereopods, pleopods, uropods and mouthparts, the species described below shows a very close affinity to Tanaella . The uropods are very short for a Tanaella , and clearly not “pincer-like” (see diagnosis of Tanaella by Larsen & Heard, 2004b), although this configuration is also approached by, for example, T. kroyeri Larsen et al., 2009 . However, the present species takes this reduction in the uropods much further, and, most distinctly, has evident eyelobes, although no ocelli were observed in the preserved material: Larsen and Heard (2004b) included a lack of eyelobes in their generic diagnosis for Tanaella , and Larsen (2005) considered it one diagnostic feature of the Tanaellidae .

The species below shows some superficial similarities to the Cryptocopinae, but the conformation of the uropods, antennae, maxilliped endites and chelipeds, and the pereopod spination all suggest otherwise.

This species is therefore attributed to a separate genus, closely related to Tanaella , but with the presence of eyelobes, probably more plesiomorphic. It is not possible at present to say whether the additional features of the tuberculate rugosity on the cheliped or the microtrichia on the pereopods are generic or specific characters.