From 0782b62d2ae1aa65e59bb7768fe9d84b70df60dc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ggserver Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 13:22:23 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add updates up until 2025-05-06 13:17:19 --- .../DC/03D9DC55FFF50C3759B1FCDA67C1096D.xml | 555 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 555 insertions(+) create mode 100644 data/03/D9/DC/03D9DC55FFF50C3759B1FCDA67C1096D.xml diff --git a/data/03/D9/DC/03D9DC55FFF50C3759B1FCDA67C1096D.xml b/data/03/D9/DC/03D9DC55FFF50C3759B1FCDA67C1096D.xml new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..55c823fdd38 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/03/D9/DC/03D9DC55FFF50C3759B1FCDA67C1096D.xml @@ -0,0 +1,555 @@ + + + +Phalangipus somnathensis Sureandiran, Karuppasamy & Suyani, 2024 - a junior synonym of Encephaloides armstrongi Wood-Mason in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891 (Crustacea, Brachyura, Inachidae) + + + +Author + +Ng, Peter K. L. +Lee Kong Chian Natural History Museum, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, 2 Conservatory Drive, 117377, Republic of Singapore + + + +Author + +Patel, Heris +Animal Taxonomy and Ecology Laboratory, Department of Life Sciences, Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University, Patan- 384265, Gujarat, India + + + +Author + +Trivedi, Jigneshkumar +Animal Taxonomy and Ecology Laboratory, Department of Life Sciences, Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University, Patan- 384265, Gujarat, India + +text + + +Zootaxa + + +2025 + +2025-04-29 + + +5627 + + +3 + + +594 +600 + + + + +https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5627.3.13 + +journal article +309587 +10.11646/zootaxa.5627.3.13 +d7a6cd73-c7f4-4050-bfc2-3764942a2d14 +1175-5326 +15326163 +C6041C25-6F69-440C-B0E6-328EB1091AB6 + + + + + + + +Encephaloides armstrongi +Wood-Mason + +in +Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891 + + + + + + +( +Figures 1 +, +2 +) + + + + + + +Encephaloides armstrongi +Wood-Mason + +in + +Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891: 259 + +.—Wood-Mason +in + +Alcock & Anderson 1896 +, p. 19 + +, figs 2, 2a. + + + + + +Encephaloides Armstrongi +— + +Wood-Mason +in + +Alcock 1899: 47–49 + +. + + + + + + +Phalangipus somnathensis +Sureandiran, Karuppasamy & Suyani, 2024: 1375 + + +, figs. 2–5. + + + + + +Type material examined +. + +Holotype +of + +Phalangipus somnathensis +Sureandiran, Karuppasamy & Suyani, 2024 + +: male (carapace missing) (14.0 mm × 19.0 mm) ( +KU +/COF/PS.1), +Veraval +fishing harbour, +Gujarat +, northwest coast of +India +, +20°50’N +70°28’E +, coll. +B. Sureandiran +, + +24 January 2023 + +. + + + +Other material examined. + +Encephaloides armstrongi +Wood-Mason + +in + +Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891: +1 + +male ( +22.3 mm +× +24.8 mm +), +1 female +( +20.6 mm +× 21.0 mm) ( +ZRC 2014.0343 +), +Gulf +of +Oman +, +23º22.98’N +58º59.10’E +— +23º23.23’N +58º59.87’E +, ca. + +350 m + +, coll. RRS +Charles Darwin Cruise +143, + +11 December 2002 + +. + + +Comparative material examined +. + +Phalangipus longipes +(Linnaeus, 1758) + +: + +1 male +( +19.3 mm +× +21.3 mm +), +1 female +( +15.3 mm +× +19.5 mm +) ( +ZRC 2013.0181 +), Angsila fish port, +Chonburi +, +Thailand +, coll. +S. Panhan +et al., + +3 December 2004 + + +. + + + + +Remarks +. Careful examination of the figures in + +Sureandiran +et al. +(2024) + +leads us to conclude that the photograph of the specimen depicted in dorsal view ( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: fig. 2) is clearly not the same as that shown in the ventral view ( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: fig. 3). This includes the drawing of the dorsal aspects of the carapace, which was traced from the photograph by + +Sureandiran +et al. +(2024 + +: fig. 5a). The relative lengths of the ambulatory legs in their figure 2 are much longer than those in figure 3, with the P5 almost as long as P4. Significantly, in their figure 3, the last ambulatory leg is quite short, much shorter than the fourth leg. The structure, missing and damaged leg conditions in the two figures also do not match (e.g., the size and proportions of the right P4 and P5)—it is not possible the two are the same specimen. We believe the authors somehow inadvertently assumed they were the same. + + +The specimen figured in the overall dorsal view by + +Sureandiran +et al. +(2024 + +: fig. 2) clearly belong to + +Phalangipus + +but we cannot be sure of the species as the diagnostic species characters used by +Griffin (1973) +are not visible from the photograph or his drawing of the carapace ( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: fig. 5A). The prominent intestinal spine noted by + +Sureandiran +et al. +(2024) + +as a diagnostic character for their species is also present in + +P. indicus +(Leach, 1815) + +, + +P. australiensis +Rathbun, 1918 + +and + +P. hystrix +(Miers, 1886) + +, so it is of little use in identifying the specimen. The identity of this specimen, however is irrelevant because the +holotype +, and the only extant specimen, is the specimen showing the ventral parts but lacking the carapace ( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: fig. 3). Fortunately, even without the carapace, the identity of this damaged +holotype +is clear. + + + +FIGURE 1. +Holotype male (14.0 mm × 19.0 mm) (KU/COF/PS.1) of + +Phalangipus somnathensis +Sureandiran, Karuppasamy & Suyani, 2024 + +(= + +Encephaloides armstrongi +Wood-Mason + +in +Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891 +), Gujarat, India. A, pleon (outer view); B, inner surface of pleon with gonopods; C, outer view of right chela; D, outer view of left chela + + + +The photograph of the ventral view of the +holotype +( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: fig. 3) shows five characters that merit attention that were confirmed through an examination of the specimen: + + +(1) the thoracic sternum is partially crushed on the right side but it is clear from the drawing and the photograph of the ventral surface that although sternites 3 and 4 are fused, the two sternites are clearly separated, with sternite 3 subtriangular in shape, and separated from the subtrapezoidal sternite 4 by a wide, almost right-angled cleft, with the distal margin tranversely straight. The male sternopleonal cavity reaches to about half the length of sternite 4 ( +Fig. 2B +) and surface of sternites 3 and 4 are almost smooth and relatively flat, without any prominences. This is also depicted in the drawing ( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: figs. 3, 5b; +Fig. 2B +). + + +(2) The right third maxilliped and the anteroexternal angle of the merus is strongly expanded to form a large auriculiform structure (see also +Fig. 2B +). + + + +FIGURE 2. + +Encephaloides armstrongi +Wood-Mason + +in +Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891 +, male (22.3 mm × 24.8 mm) (ZRC 2014.0343), Gulf of Oman. A, overall dorsal view (right P5 postmoult regrowth); B, ventral view showing buccal cavity, anterior thoracic sternum and pleon; C, right chela; D, left G1 (ventral view); E, left G1 (dorsal view). + + + +(3) The cutting edges of the chela are lined with broad triangular teeth along entire length, without any proximal subtruncate tooth on proximal part of dactylus ( +Fig. 2C +) (see also +Fig. 1C, D +). + + +(4) P5 is clearly the shortest pereopod and P2 the longest; P5, however, is prominently shorter than P4, with the P5 merus only about two-thirds the length of the P4 merus ( +Fig. 2A +). + + +(5) The pleon is relatively broad and somites 3–6 together form a subrectangular shape, with the lateral margins of somite 6 prominently convex. This is also evident in the drawing ( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: fig. 5c; +Fig. 1A +). + + +In addition, the G1 is not short as figured by ( + +Sureandiran +et al. +2024 + +: figs. 4, 5f–h), it is actually much longer ( +Fig. 1B +). + + + +FIGURE 3. + +Phalangipus longipes +(Linnaeus, 1758) + +, male (19.3 mm × 21.3 mm) (ZRC 2013.0181), Thailand. A, overall dorsal view; B, right chela; C, buccal cavity, anterior thoracic sternum and pleon; D, thoracic sternum and pleon. + + + +All the characters discussed above are identical with those of + +Encephaloides armstrongi + +( +Fig. 2B–E +). In contrast, the ventral surface of all other species of + +Phalangipus + +is quite diagnostic: male thoracic sternite 3 is separated from sternite 4 by a shallow cleft, and with the distal margin of sternite 4 gently sloping; each lateral edge of male thoracic sternite 4 has a prominent swelling which is lined with relatively long stiff setae; the male sternopleonal cavity reaches to just before area between sternites 3 and 4 ( +Fig. 3C +); the overall male pleon shape is triangular, with somites 3 and 4 much wider and somites 5 and 6 rectangular in shape ( +Fig. 3C, D +) (see also +Griffin 1973 +: fig. 6). It must be noted that while the merus of the third maxilliped of + +Phalangipus + +has the anteroexternal angle auriculiform ( +Fig. 3C +), it is distinctly less expanded than that in + +Encephaloides + +( +Fig. 2B +). Most of the cutting edges of the fingers of the adult male chela are lined with distinct teeth but the proximal part of pollex is unarmed with the proximal part of dactylus possessing a distinct subtruncate tooth ( +Fig. 3B +); this is different from the condition in + +Encephaloides + +in which the entire cutting edge has uniform cutting teeth ( +Figs. 1C, D +, +2C +). Another distinctive character of all species of + +Phalangipus + +is that while P5 is the shortest leg, it is only slightly shorter than P4, with the P5 merus only slightly shorter than the P4 merus ( +Fig. 3A +). In + +Encephaloides + +, however, the P5 merus is markedly shorter than the P5 merus ( +Fig. 2A, B +). In addition, all other known species of + +Phalangipus + +have a relatively slender G1, which is gently curve outwards with the distal part rounded or tapering (cf. +Griffin 1973 +: figs. 5d, e, 8, 9a–f). Only in + +P. trachysternus +Griffin, 1973 + +from +Australia +is the G1 proportionally much stouter, strongly setose with the distal part subtruncate ( +Griffin 1973 +: fig. +9g +, h), although its general structure is like those of its congeners. None have the straight G1 with the tip bifurcated as in + +Encephaloides + +( +Figs. 1B +, +2D, E +), which is a distinct genus character. + + +As such, we have no doubt that the +holotype +of + +Phalangipus somnathensis +Sureandiran, Karuppasamy & Suyani, 2024 + +is actually + +Encephaloides armstrongi +Wood-Mason + +in +Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891 +, and the two species are synonymised herein. + +Encephaloides armstrongi + +is a very distinctive species with a prominently swollen carapace ( +Fig. 2A +), and we believe that if the carapace had not been detached, the species would not have been misidentified. In any case, + +E. armstrongi + +was described from the Bay of Bengal, and the species has been reported from various parts of the Arabian Sea, including +Gujarat +(see +Wood-Mason & Alcock 1891 +; +Alcock 1895 +, +1899 +; +Alcock & Anderson 1896 +; +Griffin 1974 +; + +Creasey +et al. +1997 + +; +Kazmi 1997 +; +Kazmi & Moazzam 2014 +; +Dash & Koya 2017 +). + + + + \ No newline at end of file