Parastacus defossus Faxon, 1898: 686 Ortmann 1902: 293 Riek 1971: 134 Buckup and Rossi 1980: 677 Hobbs 1989: 79 Crandall & De Grave 2017: 641 Rogers et al . 2020: 879 Huber et al . 2022: 276 Ríos-Escalante et al . 2022: 1129 Huber et al . 2024: 14 Taxonomic review of the genus Parastacus Huxley, 1879 (Decapoda: Astacidea: Parastacidae) with description of five new species Ribeiro, Felipe Bezerra Araujo, Paula Beatriz Zootaxa 2024 2024-05-23 5455 1 1 84 7W94J Faxon, 1898 Faxon 1898 [151,554,690,717] Malacostraca Parastacidae Parastacus Animalia Decapoda 25 26 Arthropoda species defossus  ( Fig. 13–14)      Parastacus defossus Faxon, 1898: 686, pl. 67: figs. 3, 4. —  Ortmann 1902: 293.—­  Riek 1971: 134.—­  Buckup and Rossi 1980: 677.—­  Hobbs 1989: 79, fig. 370; 1991: 801, fig. 3f.—­  Crandall & De Grave 2017: 641.—­  Rogers et al. 2020: 879(key), fig. 23.68A.—­  Huber et al. 2022: 276(key).—­ De los  Ríos-Escalante et al. 2022: 1129(appendix), fig. 1e.—­  Huber et al. 2024: 14(key).     TypeLocality. Montevideo( Uruguay).  Type material re-examined.  Holotype, ♂, Uruguay, Montevideo, mouth of La Plata, coll. W. E. Safford, U. S S. “Vandalia” ( USNM 19647) [Photos examined].  Material examined.  Uruguay—­ one male, 1897, coll. Rodrigues(MACN–In 4970–2);  two males, Maldonado, Ruta13, km 180, coll. I. Larossa(FC–UDELAR w/n).   Diagnosis and description. Faxon (1898).   Remarks.Additional morphological characters not mentioned in previous descriptions include: eyes small ( Fig. 13A, B, C); front narrow ( Fig. 13, B); epistome anterolateral section with an inconspicuous conical projection ( Fig. 14A); antennal scale lateral margin straight ( Fig. 14D); antennule internal ventral border of basal article unarmed ( Fig. 14A); mandible with cephalic molar process molariform and caudal molar process bicuspidate, incisor lobe with nine teeth; the second and third teeth from the anterior are the largest ( Fig. 14E); SLP4 very close to each other, medial keel present and not inflated; SLP5 smallest and close to each other, median keel present and not inflated; SLP6 larger than SLP4 and SLP5 with slightly concave dorsal surface, medial keel present and inflated; SLP7 largest and with slightly concave surface, median keel present and slightly inflated; SLP8 smaller than SLP 7, median keel absent, vertical arms of paired sternopleural bridges close to each other, bullar lobes visible and close to each other ( Fig. 14B, C); male cuticle partition present. This species is morphologically similar to  P. pugnaxand  P. caeruleodactylusin having globose chelipeds, post orbital carinae weakly prominent, telson subrectangular and triangular rostrum, but it is distinguishable in having shorter dactylus and carpus with one blunt spine near the distal end.   Distribution. Uruguay: provinces of Montevideoand Maldonado( Faxon, 1898). This species was recorded in Brazil, without a detailed locality, for the first time by Ortmann (1902). In the review of Buckup & Rossi (1980), they consider that this species occurs in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. The authors redescribed the species based on Brazilian specimens. However, the analysis of photos of the typematerial of  P. defossusand additional material from FC-UDELAR and all Brazilian material previously identified as  P. defossus, allowed us to raise the hypothesis that this species does not occur in Brazil. The Brazilian populations probably are composed of cryptic species that need further investigations using molecular tools and are not included here.  Color of live specimens.Not available.  Habitat and Ecology.Burrows ( Faxon, 1898). More data not available. [151,590,952,978] Uruguay Montevideo 25 26 1 Montevideo holotype USNM La Plata & W. E. Safford & Safford, U. S S. Uruguay Montevideo 25 26 USNM 19647 1 1 Montevideo holotype [439,1163,1060,1087] Rodrigues Uruguay Uruguay 25 26 1 1 Ruta & I. Larossa Uruguay Maldonado 25 26 2 2 Maldonado