Arenopontia subterranea Kunz, 1937 sensu Şerban (1959)

Sak, Serdar, Karaytuğ, Süphan & Huys, Rony, 2024, A revision of the genus Arenopontia Kunz, 1937 (Copepoda, Harpacticoida, Arenopontiidae), including the description of five new species, Zootaxa 5433 (1), pp. 1-50 : 40

Arenopontia subterranea Kunz, 1937 sensu Şerban (1959)

Şerban’s (1959) report from a fine sandy beach in front of the sanatorium in Agigea ( Romania) is the first record from the Black Sea basin that was attributed to A. subterranea . His description is totally lacking in illustrations and no data were provided for the body length of both sexes. In the absence of information about the ornamentation of P1 enp-1 it is impossible to refer the Pontic material to either of the two groups recognized herein. Although Şerban (1959) announced a detailed description by himself & Eitel-Lang, this never happened (C. Pleşa, pers. comm. to RH; see also Sak et al. 2008: 413). Şerban (1959) pointed out that the Romanian material deviated from Kunz’s (1937) original description in several aspects, including (1) the P1 endopod being distinctly longer, (2) the inner distal seta of P1 exp-3 not being modified, (3) the dorsal seta of the caudal ramus being slender and not foliaceous, and (4) the male P5 possessing five elements instead of four. Although Şerban (1959) admitted that such differences would normally justify establishing a distinct species for the Pontic material, he refrained from doing so because of previous reports of morphologically divergent populations of A. subterranea in the Mediterranean (Chappuis 1954a-b). He also suggested that detailed study of more material from a wider range of localities would be required before a strong recommendation for proposing a separate Black Sea subspecies could be made. More specifically, Şerban (1959) called for confirmation of the non-modified dorsal caudal setae in the Pontic material since in all other populations they appeared to be foliaceous.

The long P1 endopod rules out conspecificity with A. anatolica sp. nov. but not with A. basibuyuki sp. nov., which also has a total of five elements on P5. Şerban (1959) referred only to the marginal elements (thus not the outer basal seta) in his comparison with Kunz’ (1937) and Chappuis’ (1954b) descriptions of the male P5, indicating his observation of four elements excluded the outer basal seta. Unfortunately, no information was given about the female condition.