Revision of the egg morphology of Eulimnadia (Crustacea, Branchiopoda, Spinicaudata) Author Rabet, Nicolas Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris 6, UMR 7138, Systématique, Adaptation, Évolution, CNRS UPMC MNHN IRD, case 05, 7 quai St Bernard, F- 75005 Paris (France) nicolas. rabet @ upmc. fr rabet@upmc.fr text Zoosystema 2010 2010-09-30 32 3 373 391 http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.5252/z2010n3a1 journal article 8095 10.5252/z2010n3a1 8f1c0fde-2086-43a6-bd59-d462151b5f02 1638-9387 4521152 Eulimnadia geayi Daday de Deés, 1926 ( Fig. 3 A-C) Eulimnadia geayi Daday de Deés, 1926: 553 , fig. 139. — Martin 1989: 108, fig. 4D-F. — Pereira & Garcia 2001: 642 , figs 2, 9B. Limnadia geayi – Brtek 1997: 57 . TYPE LOCALITY . — Sarare, probably in Venezuela , is the first locality indicated in the descrition ( Daday de Deés 1926 ) (see Remarks). MATERIAL EXAMINED. — Venezuela . Guanaparo, Geay, 1899,> 10 eggs (MNHN-Bp330). — Plains between Apure and Guanaparo rivers, Geay, 1892,> 10 eggs (MNHN-Bp331). — “Haut Sarare”, Geay,> 10 eggs (MNHN-Bp323, 324). RANGE . — Various places in Venezuela ( Daday de Deés 1926 ; Pereira & Garcia 2001 ). Localities in Mexico ( Daday de Deés 1926 ) should be confirmed by genetic or egg morphology studies. EGG MORPHOLOGY Cylindrical eggs with one end wider and domed, giving a vaguely pentagonal shape. The narrow ridges are parallel along the length of the cylinder, separating large depressions,and are produced apically.However in the domed end, the furrows are randomly distributed, delimiting more or less hexagonal depressions. For one egg in good position for measurements,height is 171 µm and diameter is 145 to 182 µm . REMARKS According to Daday de Deés (1926) , MNHN-Bp330 and MNHN-Bp331 ( Fig. 3C ) were collected in Venezuela and MNHN-Bp323 and MNHN-Bp324 (under the unpublished name E.colombica )in Colombia .However “Sarare” indicated by Daday de Deés in Colombia is a homonym of the type locality which is probably in Venezuela where Geay collected numerous other aquatic organisms (see Roubaud 1906 ; Ball & Shpeley 2005 ). Therefore, the occurrence of this species in Colombia is not established. Our results are identical to those published by Martin (1989) from other type specimens stored in Hungarian Museum, confirming that the specimens labelled “ E. colombica ” are in fact E. geayi , and by Pereira & Garcia (2001) from other Venezuelan material. Daday de Deés’s (1926) analysis of eggs from the type specimen seems to be partially erroneous (see Discussion) and Colombian material reported by Roessler (1995) seems to be another species.