Lepidopa benedicti Schmitt, 1935

Boyko, Christopher B., 2023, Reappraisal of the status of two recently described western Atlantic species of sand crabs (Anomura: Albuneidae), Nauplius (e 2023021) 31, pp. 1-7 : 4-6

Lepidopa benedicti Schmitt, 1935

( Figs. 3 , 4 )

Lepidopa benedicti Schmitt, 1935: 210 . — Boyko, 2002:172–179,fig. 56, 57 (and references therein).

Lepidopa boykoi Ortiz, Tello-Musi and Morales-Moreno, 2018: 50–58 , figs. 2–5 (new synonym).

Remarks. Ortiz et al. (2018) distinguished the holotype and only specimen of L. boykoi from other species in the genus found in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean in their key to species using the following set of characters:“pedúnculos oculares rectangulares; con corneas presentes en sus ángulos basales internos; tacón del dactilo del pereópodo I redondeado; borde ventral distal del dactilo cubierto de setas largas cuvadas.” However, none of these are unique to this specimen.

Rectangular ocular peduncles are found on several species in the genus, including L. benedicti and the pigmentation found in the proximomesial corner of the ocular peduncles (e.g., Fig. 3A ) is only an artifact of preservation (see Remarks under various species in Boyko, 2002 where dispersal of pigments is noted). It is unclear what “tacón del dactilo del pereópodo I redondeado” (heel of pereopod dactyl I rounded) means as there is no heel present on pereopod I; it is possible the original description meant to refer to pereopod II, which does have a rounded heel as also seen in L. benedicti and several other species of Lepidopa . The notation of long curved setae on the ventral edge of the dactylus (which dactylus the descriptions refer to is not clear, perhaps all of them) is not diagnostic, as this feature is found in all species in the genus. The drawings of the whole animal (e.g., Ortiz et al., 2018: fig. 1b and inset) are of limited utility and comparison of the photo of the dorsal view (Ortiz et al., 2018: fig. 5a, c), despite its suboptimal angle and small size, clearly shows that at least some of the carapace grooves (CG) are inaccurately placed or excluded from the line drawings. The most glaring error is that CGs 6 and 7 are placed much too posteriorly on the carapace in the line drawing ( Fig. 2A vs. 2B herein). The line drawing shows an incomplete submarginal groove which is also seen in L. benedicti ; this is not visible in the photograph of Ortiz et al. (2018). The drawings of the individual parts of the holotype appear more accurate renderings, although fig. 4e of pereopod III clearly shows that the dactyl of this same appendage is drawn inaccurately in fig. 1b and the tip of the heel in fig. 4f appears broken ( Fig. 3B ). Overall, the shape of the dactyli of pereopods I–IV matches those of L. benedicti ( Fig. 4A–C vs. 4D, E).

Lepidopa benedicti is known from the central Atlantic coast of Florida, USA, and Gulf of Mexico south to Veracruz, Mexico, in up to 3 m depth ( Boyko, 2002). The holotype of L. boykoi was also collected from the littoral zone of Veracruz, Mexico, at the southernmost known edge of the species’ range .

When all the above similarities, both morphological and distributional, are considered, L. boykoi is clearly a synonym of L. benedicti . The author of the present note profoundly regrets to synonymize this species (for obvious reasons), but it seems unavoidable.

Figures

Figure 2. Zygopa lalanai Ortiz, 2015, holotype male (CNCR 27818) (A–D) and Zygopa michaelis Holthuis, 1961, paralectotype male (RMNH 14502) (E-H). A) Left pereopod II, lateral view.B) Left pereopod III, lateral view.C) Left pereopod IV, lateral view. D) Telson, dorsal view. E) Right pereopod II, lateral view. F) Left pereopod III, lateral view. G) Left pereopod IV, lateral view. H) Telson, dorsal view. Not to scale. A–D modified from Ortiz (2015); E–F modified from Boyko, 2002.

Figure 3.Lepidopa boykoi Ortiz,Tello-Musi and Morales-Moreno, 2018, holotype female (CNCR 34795) (A)and Lepidopa benedicti Schmitt, 1935, ovigerous female (AMNH 14425) (B). A) Dorsal view. B) Carapace, dorsal view. Double headed arrow indicates misplaced CG 6 and 7 in A; single headed arrow indicates incorrectly drawn dactylus of pereopod III. Not to scale.A modified from Ortiz et al. (2018); B modified from Boyko (2002).

Figure 4. Lepidopa boykoi Ortiz, Tello-Musi and Morales-Moreno, 2018, holotype female (CNCR 34795) (A–C) and Lepidopa benedicti Schmitt, 1935, female (UNLZ 2122) (D–F). A) Left pereopod II, lateral view. B) Left pereopod III, lateral view. C) Left pereopod IV, lateral view. D) Left pereopod II, lateral view.E) Left pereopod III, lateral view.F) Left pereopod IV, lateral view. Not to scale. A–C modified from Ortiz et al. (2018); D, F modified from Boyko (2002).