Revision of Bowmaniella sensu B cescu, 1968 (Crustacea: Mysida: Mysidae: Gastrosaccinae): a taxonomic conundrum Author Heard, Richard W. Author Price, W. Wayne text Zootaxa 2006 1269 1 29 journal article 10.5281/zenodo.173223 92852412-3d0c-4a65-bfe7-fa42233fcaa6 1175­5326 173223 Genus Coifmanniella , n. g. Bowmaniella ( Bowmaniella ) Bäcescu, 1968 : 356 (in part) ( nomen nudum ). Bowmaniella ( Coifmaniella ) Bäcescu, 1968 : 356 (in part) ( nomen nudum ). Diagnosis. Carapace with posterodorsal margin having mid­dorsal lobe concave posteriorly and adjacent medial lobes attenuated, reflected anterodorsally ( Fig. 8 G) or non­reflected ( Fig. 8 F). Male third pleopod complex; terminal male having bow with an associated apophysis, penultimate male having ventral process on outer branch, lacking inner stylet on inner branch ( Fig. 2 A, B). Abdominal segment 5 with posterodorsal margin lacking articulated process. Uropodal endopod with series of small spiniform setae distal to statocyst. Telson cleft variable, depth from 10 to more than 40% of total telson length. Type species. Gastrosaccus johnsoni Tattersall, 1937 , here designated. Other species. C. merjonesi Băcescu, 1968 ; C. mexicana Tattersall, 1951 ; C. parageia Brattegard, 1970 . Etymology. The genus is named in honour of Isabella Coifmann, in recognition of her pioneering contribution to the knowledge of Brazilian Mysida . Remarks. Coifmanniella n. g. is immediately distinguished from the genus Bowmaniella n. g. by lacking an articulated process on the posterodorsal margin of the fifth abdominal segment. Coifmannella further differs from Bowmaniella by: (1) having a bow with an associated apophysis on the terminal male third pleopod; (2) the penultimate male having a ventral process on outer branch and lacking an inner stylet on inner branch; and (3) the presence of small spiniform­setae distal to the uropodal statocyst. Inconsistencies and confusion in some the characters used by Băcescu (1968) to distinguish the nominal subgenera of Bowmaniella and Coifmanniella led Brattegard (1970a) and Holmquist (1982) to not recognize their validity. Based on the recognition of the distinct differences in the penultimate and ultimate male stages (e.g. development and complexity of the third male pleopod), and in the setation patterns of the uropodal endopod, we have a better understanding of the taxonomy and systematics of Coifmanniella n. g. as diagnosed in this report. This information leads us to synonymise seven of 11 nominal species now attributable to Coifmanniella . The following four species are now recognized.