Cryptapseudes Băcescu, 1976

Morales-Núñez, Andrés G., Heard, Richard W. & Bird, Graham J., 2019, Two new apseudomorphan species (Crustacea: Tanaidacea: Metapseudidae) from Mo‘orea Island (Society Islands, French Polynesia) with taxonomic keys, Zootaxa 4564 (1), pp. 213-247 : 230

Genu s Cryptapseudes Băcescu, 1976

Type-species. Cryptapseudes sankarankuttyi Băcescu, 1976 Species. Cryptapseudes acutifrons Băcescu, 1976 ; C. leroyi David & Heard, 2015 ; C. mamua sp. nov.; C. romanae Guţu, 1991 ; C. sankarankuttyi Băcescu, 1976 .

Diagnosis. “Body small, robust. Antennule having main flagellum with two to five articles; minor flagellum uniarticulate. Antenna with small squama. Maxilliped with palp article-2 having strongly developed, distolateral spiniform seta. Cheliped and pereopod-1 with exopods. Pereonites with long, strongly developed, stiff, dorsolateral setae. Pleonites compressed and completely fused with telson, strongly developed upturned, spiniform process dorsally; five pairs of reduced biramous pleopods present. Sexual dimorphism pronounced; adult males with massive chelipeds; chelipeds of female much smaller than those of male. Uropodal endopod with six or fewer articles, exopod small, uniarticulate” ( David & Heard 2015).

Remarks. The subfamilial status of metapseudid genus Cryptapseudes remains unsettled. Based on the presence of (1) an antennal squama, (2) exopods on the chela and pereopod-1, (3) five pairs of pleopods, and (4) the abdomen and telson being completely fused dorsally, David & Heard (2015: p. 293) questioned the placement of this genus within the Synapseudinae Guţu, 1972 , which, as then defined, shared none of these characters. Following the same reasoning, Heard et al. (2018: p. 7) removed Cryptapseudes from the Synapseudinae indicating that it shares more characters in common with the subfamilies Metapseudinae Lang, 1970 and Chondropodinae Guţu 2008 . The systematic status of Cryptapseudes and other genera within the Metapseudidae is being reevaluated and revised by Piotr Jóźwiak (pers. comm. 2016).

It should be noted that David & Heard (2015: fig. 4D) inadvertently confused pereopod-4 of the female with that of the already described pereopod-3 (see their fig. 4C). Pereopod-4, which is morphologically similar to pereopods 5 and 6, is correctly indicated in their lateral views of the male and female (see their fig. 1A, C).