Aparatanais malignus (Larsen 2001) BIRD, GRAHAM J. & BAMBER, ROGER N., 2013
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3676.1.1 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7AB2D8F5-62F2-46D1-BDE4-BF91D6513797 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E787D0-FF8D-FFE2-7B8B-D544B62E72AD |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Aparatanais malignus (Larsen 2001) |
| status |
comb. nov. |
Aparatanais malignus (Larsen 2001) View in CoL comb.nov.
Figures 4–6 View FIGURE 4 View FIGURE 5 View FIGURE 6 , 37A–B, 40A–B
Paratanais malignus: Larsen (2001) : 368–372, figs 11–13, 17.
Paratanais maleficus: Larsen (2001) : paratype P.54476, figs 5–6 [non maleficus ].
Paratanais perturbatius: Larsen (2001) : paratype P.54480 [non perturbatius ].
Material examined. Paratype ♀ on microslides (P.54483.001). Cited specimens: four non-ovigerous ♀♀ (one partly dissected), six mancae (P.56435). From kelp, Ecklomia radiata (C.Agardh) J. Agardh, at 4–4.5 m in Botany Bay , Australia; see Larsen (2001) for details .
Remarks. Type and other cited material of Paratanais malignus from Sydney Harbour was re-examined in order to clarify some aspects of the morphology of this species. The same microslide-mounted specimen used by lacinia mobilis; C right mandible; D right mandible incisor; E labium; F maxilliped (palps omitted); G maxilliped palp; H maxilliped palp article-2 serrate spine; J chela [left]; K chela [right]. Scale bars: i: 0.25 mm for A–G, 0.125 mm for H; ii: 0.25 mm for J, K.
this was not evident in the illustration (fig. 11G) and it is actually much broader and crenulate ( Fig. 5A,B View FIGURE 5 ). There was some confusion over the setal insertions on the maxilliped palp (Larsen: fig. 12B) and the actual arrangement is typical ( Fig. 5G View FIGURE 5 ), while the serrations on the modified spine are more distinct ( Fig. 5H View FIGURE 5 ). The cheliped dactylus does have a peg-like spine on the incisive margin ( Fig. 5K View FIGURE 5 ) and compared to Larsen (fig. 13A–C) there are additional setae on the merus and carpus of pereopod-1 ( Fig. 6A View FIGURE 6 ) and two, not one, inferodistal spines on the carpus of pereopods 2–3 ( Fig. 6B–C View FIGURE 6 ) as well as a simple seta. Similarly, pereopods 4–6 have, typically, four distal spines and a simple seta on the carpus and two inferodistal propodal spines ( Fig. 6D–F View FIGURE 6 ). Examination of types and other cited material of the other two paratanaid species described by Larsen (op. cit.) has shows that they are, in part, A. malignus — see below Figs. 37 and 40.
This eastern Australian species, P. malignus , clearly falls within the scope of Aparatanais and is here transferred. It differs from A. spinanotandus comb. nov. in having an undivided carapace ( Fig. 4A View FIGURE 4 ), a shorter pereopod-1 merus, larger pereopod carpal spines, and possession of epimeral pappose setae (pleonites 1–4, Fig. 4A View FIGURE 4 , not pleonites 1–5 as shown by Larsen fig. 12A). The South American species A. denticulatus comb. nov. is more similar, but the carapace is divided into plates and the modified palp spine is multifurcate rather than merely strongly serrate.
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.