Minibiotus

Tumanov, Denis V., 2005, Notes on the Tardigrada of Thailand, with a description of Macrobiotus alekseevi sp. nov. (Eutardigrada, Macrobiotidae), Zootaxa 999, pp. 1-16 : 11-13

Minibiotus sp. ( Figs. 22, 23 , 38–41 )

Samples 2, 3 (4 specimens).

Body length 279.3–319.2 m ( Fig. 38 ). Body white. With small granular eye spots (not in all specimens). Cuticle smooth without pores and granulation on legs. Bucco­pharyngeal apparatus of Minibiotus type ( Figs. 22 , 39 ). Buccal cavity without peribuccal lamellae, with a long, thin medio­dorsal transverse ridge only. Buccal tube thin with typical strengthening bar. Pharyngeal bulb with apophyses, two macroplacoids and a poorly developed microplacoid. First macroplacoid with a constriction near the middle. Claws of hufelandi ­ type ( Figs. 23 , 40, 41 ) with minute stalk, distinct distal part of the basal portion and relatively short common tract. Primary and secondary branches diverge below half of claw height, main branches with well developed accessory points. Claws of fourth pair of legs longer than claws of first three pairs of legs. All claws with lunules, which are distinctly larger on claws of fourth pairs of legs. Two small cuticular thickenings are present below claw bases of first three pairs of legs.

No eggs were found.

Remarks. Within the Minibiotus genus only three species have two macroplacoids. This species differs from Minibiotus africanus Binda & Pilato, 1994 in wider buccal tube (pt value 9.0– 11.1 in Minibiotus sp. and 5.7 in Minibiotus africanus ), stylet supports inserted on buccal tube in more caudal position (pt value 68.1–70.0 in Minibiotus sp. and 66.8 in Minibiotus africanus ), different buccal armature and longer claws (pt value for the outer claws of hind legs: 30.0– 33.3 in Minibiotus sp. and 25.0 in Minibiotus africanus ) ( Binda & Pilato 1994).

Minibiotus sp. differs from Minibiotus scopulus Claxton, 1998 in having smaller claws (pt value for the outer claws of hind legs: 30.0– 33.3 in Minibiotus sp. and 39.6 in Minibiotus scopulus ) with well developed lunules ( Claxton 1998).

Minibiotus sp. differs from Minibiotus fallax Pilato, Claxton & Binda, 1989 in the absence of gibbosities on the cuticle ( Pilato et al. 1989b).

This material undoubtedly represents a new species, but in the author’s opinion it could not be described in the absence of eggs.

Figures

FIGURES 17 – 23. Macrobiotus alekseevi sp. nov. 17, 18 — general appearance of abnormal eggs, 19, 20 — processes of abnormal eggs, 21 — ventral side of a paratype hind leg with zone of thickened cuticle (arrow). Minibiotus sp. 22 — cephalic part of the body, ventral, 23 — claws of the IV pair of legs (phase contrast).

FIGURES 38 – 41. Minibiotus sp. 38 — habitus, 39 — bucco­pharyngeal apparatus, dorsal, 40 — claws of the III pair of legs, 41 — claws of the IV pair of legs.