Bonnierilla altera Stock, 1967
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/megataxa.4.1.1 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6422213 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C487CB-EFA0-3AC1-FCEF-FC57FAE3FE8E |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Bonnierilla altera Stock, 1967 |
| status |
|
Bonnierilla altera Stock, 1967
( Figs. 161 View FIGURE 161 , 162 View FIGURE 162 )
Syn: Bonnierilla longipes: Canu, 1892: 197 , pl. 9, fig. 4- 13, pl. 10, fig. 1.
Material examined. 1 ♀ (MNHN-IU-2018-1839) and 1 dissected ♀ (figured) from Polycarpa pomaria (Savigny, 1816) , Portugal.
Description of female. Body ( Fig. 161A View FIGURE 161 ) compressed, 3.90 mmlong. Prosome 3.32 mmlong, consistingof well-defined cephalosome and inflated, unsegmented metasome. Posterior border of cephalosome extended to form sculptured flared “collar” overlapping anterior part of metasome; posterolateral corners of dorsal shield produced into blunt processes ( Fig. 161A, B View FIGURE 161 ). Free urosome small and 5-segmented. Caudal ramus ( Fig. 161C View FIGURE 161 ) curved ventrally and gradually narrowing distally, about 4.1 timeslongerthan wide (261×63 μm); armed with 6 small, naked setae; outer lateral and dorsal setae positioned at 43 and 62% of ramus length, respectively; all setae shorter than width of ramus at base.
Rostrum ( Fig. 161D View FIGURE 161 ) aslongas wide, tapering steeply.Antennule ( Fig. 161E View FIGURE 161 ) 380 μmlong, 8-segmented; firstandsecondsegments expanded; armatureformula 3, 16, 8+aesthetasc, 4, 2+aesthetasc, 2, 2+aesthetasc, and 7+aesthetasc; all setae naked and thin. Antenna ( Fig. 161F View FIGURE 161 ) slender, 4-segmented; shortcoxa unarmed; basis about 2.7 times longerthan wide, with small tubercle at outer distal corner tipped with vestigial exopodal seta; first endopodal segment about 1.4 times longer than wide, with 1 smallseta subdistally; compounddistalendopodal segment 3.8 timeslongerthan wide (141×37 μm), armed with 7 smallsetae (distal 3 blunt tipped) plusterminal claw about half as long as segment.
Labrum ( Fig. 161G View FIGURE 161 ) with setules on posterior margin and spinules on posteromedian lobe. Mandible ( Fig. 161H View FIGURE 161 ) with 5 teeth on coxal gnathobase; basis with 1 distal seta plus proximal tuft of setules on medial margin; exopod with 5 setae, distal 2 distinctly shorter than other 3; endopod incompletely articulated at base and between segments, armed with 4 and 8 setae on first and second segments, respectively; distalmost seta on first endopodal segment naked and proximalmost seta on second endopodal segment minute, spinule-like. Paragnath ( Fig. 161I View FIGURE 161 ) with strongly curved, claw-like apical process. Maxillule ( Fig. 161J View FIGURE 161 ) armedwith 10 setaeon arthrite, 1 broad seta on coxal endite, 2 unequal setae on epipodite, 3 on basis (proximal seta much smaller than distal 2), 4 each on exopod and endopod. Maxilla ( Fig. 161K View FIGURE 161 ) 5- segmented; syncoxawith 9 setae (3, 1, 2, and 3); basiswith smooth clawplus 1 large and 1 minute seta; endopod with 1, 1, and 3 setae on first to third segments, respectively. Maxilliped ( Fig. 162A View FIGURE 162 ) incompletely 2-segmentedwith 10 and 2 setae on first and second segments, respectively; setae on second segment unequal, smaller seta less than half as long as large seta.
Legs 1–4 ( Fig. 162 View FIGURE 162 B-E) with 3-segmented rami. Inner coxal seta absent in legs 1 and 2, but large seta present in legs 3 and 4. Outersetaonbasis large, slightlylonger than exopod in leg 1, but small and naked in legs 2–4. Exopod about 1.4 times longer than endopod in leg 1 and more than twice as long in legs 2–4. Spines on exopods of legs 2–4 small and blunt at tip. Third exopodal segment of legs 2–4 tapering, slightly longerthan second. Armature formula for legs 1–4 as follows:
| Coxa | Basis | Exopod | Endopod | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leg 1 | 0-0 | 1-I | I-1; I-1; III, I, 4 | 0-1; 0-1; 1, 2, 2 |
| Leg 2 | 0-0 | 1-0 | I-1; I-1; III, I, 5 | 0-1; 0-2; 1, 2, 3 |
| Leg 3 | 0-1 | 1-0 | I-1; I-1; II, I, 5 | 0-1; 0-2; 1, 2, 3 |
| Leg 4 | 0-1 | 1-0 | I-1; I-1; II, I, 5 | 0-1; 0-2; 1, 2, 2 |
Leg 5 ( Fig. 162F View FIGURE 162 ) protopod bearing small, naked outer distal seta, lacking spinules on posterior border; exopodal segment digitiform and about 3.4 times longer than wide (235×69 μm), armed with 1 naked seta distally and ornamented with 5 rows of fine spinules on inner surface.
Male. Unknown
Remarks. The two females available in this study can be identified as B. longipes sensu Canu (1892) , which was renamed by Stock (1967) as B. altera . Ourspecimens generally agree with Canu’s illustrations in having similar body size, the flared “collar” of the dorsal shield covering the cephalosome, two very unequal setae on the second segment of the maxilliped, 5 setae on the third endopodal segment of leg 1, and the same shape of exopodal segment of leg 5. Canu mentioned that this copepod was very common in “ Cynthia lurida ” (the current valid name of this ascidian is not confirmable in WoRMS) at Boulogne on the coast of France and co-occurred together with Gunenotophorus globularis , Doropygus pulex Thorell, 1859 and Lichomolgusalbens Thorell, 1859 . Interestingly, B. altera , G. globularis , and D. pulex all co-occurred in the ascidian Polycarpa pomaria in this study.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.